IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2997 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAILESH N.GODANI, PROPRIETOR, SHREEJEE TILES, C.P.UMMER ROAD, PULLEPADY, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.SADASIVAN SRI.S.ABU BAKER KUNJU SRI.JOY P.JOSE SRI.RAMAN JANARDHANAN SRI.SOJAN MATHEW SRI.K.N.KRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 2ND CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.2997 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 4th February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court. seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P12 reply and to refund the balance excess output tax paid in advance as on 6.1.2010 at the earliest and to keep all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P9 and P11 pending till such time. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no rationale on the part of the respondents for denying the claim put forth by the petitioner and that the stand taken by the respondents is not in conformity with the statutory prescriptions. The learned counsel also made reference to the relevant provisions of law, which, however, is sought to be rebutted from the part of the respondents, seeking to sustain the action. 3. The learned Government Pleader submits that, if the payment has been effected by the petitioner and if it is in excess, it is very much open to the petitioner to file an application for refund in the prescribed form under Section 11 (6) of the KVAT Act and if any such application is filed, W.P (C) No.2997 of 2010 2 the same will be considered and finalised with reference to the relevant documents and the excess amount, if any, will of course be refunded to the petitioner within a reasonable time. 4. Considering the rival submissions, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file an application as aforesaid, claiming refund before the 2nd respondent, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On filing the application as above, the same shall be considered and finalised, in accordance with law, of course, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter. If any amount is found as 'excess' to be refunded to the petitioner, the actual disbursement of the amount shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks after finalisation of the proceedings as above. It is made clear that, till the proceedings are finalised as above, all recovery proceedings pursuant to Exts.P9 and P11 shall be kept in abeyance. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ma W.P (C) No.2997 of 2010 3 W.P (C) No.2997 of 2010 4