IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH APRIL 2009 / 10TH VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 12956 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.RMP INFOTECH (P) LTD., DOOR NO.14/130(2), IST FLOOR, PARANGATH TOWERS, KALAMANDALAM JUNCTION, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SQUAD NO.IV, PALAKKAD. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (KVAT), 2ND CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 3. THE KERALA VAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.Ravindran, J. ================== W.P.(C) No.12956 of 2009 ===================== Dated this the 30th day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Bobby John, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.N.K.Shamsudheen, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. By Ext.P7 order passed on 30.3.3009, under Section 67(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, the first respondent imposed on the petitioner a penalty of Rs.18,13,050/-. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner has filed Ext.P10 appeal before the third respondent Appellate Tribunal along with Ext.P11 stay petition and Ext.P12 application seeking expeditious disposal of the appeal. In this writ petition the petitioner inter alia prays for expeditious orders on Ext.P10 appeal. In the alternative the petitioner prays for expeditious hearing and disposal of Ext.P11 stay petition. 3. Ext.P7 order was passed on 30.3.2009. The petitioner has within one month from that date filed Ext.P10 appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The appeal is therefore one filed within the period of limitation. Since the petitioner has invoked a statutory remedy available to them, I am of the opinion of the Appellate Tribunal should consider the appeal and pass orders thereon expeditiously, after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity W.P.(C) No.12956 of 2009 2 of being heard. Along with the appeal the petitioner has filed Ext.11 application praying for stay of recovery of the penalty imposed as per Ext.P7. In my opinion, the petitioner cannot be granted an unconditional order of stay, pending disposal of the appeal. In my opinion an interim order staying the recovery of the penalty imposed as per Ext.P7 can be granted if the petitioner deposits with the first respondent 1/3rd of the penalty imposed as per Ext.P7 and also furnishes security for the balance amount of penalty to the satisfaction of the first respondent. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: i) The petitioner shall on or before 31.5.2009 deposit with the first respondent 1/3rd of the penalty imposed as per Ext.P7 and shall also furnish security for the balance amount of penalty to the satisfaction of the first respondent. In the event of such payment being made and security being furnished, the recovery of the balance amount of penalty imposed as per Ext.P7 shall stand stayed subject to the outcome of Ext.P10 appeal. ii) The Appellate Authority shall in the event of the petitioner complying with the aforesaid direction take up Ext.P10 appeal and pass orders thereon after notice to and affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. This shall be done within two months from 31.5.2009, in the event of the W.P.(C) No.12956 of 2009 3 petitioner complying with the conditions stipulated as above. It is clarified that the direction for expeditious disposal of Ext.P10 appeal will take effect only if the petitioner deposits 1/3rd of the penalty and furnishes security for the balance amount of penalty within the time stipulated above. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// PA to Judge ab