IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 MFA.No. 1335 of 2000(C) ----------------------- CT.28304/1999 of COMMR. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT: ----------- SONY THOMAS, EDATHALA TRADERS, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. DR.K.B.MUHAMED KUTTY (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ------------- COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TVM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI K.B. PRADEEP THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NO.7966/2000 DISMISSED. 12/2/2008 SD/- C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. SD/- T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.F.A.NO.1335 of 2000 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. This is an appeal filed under Section 40 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, challenging Annexure C order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, whereunder, the Commissioner has restored the original penalty after cancelling the first revision order of the Deputy Commissioner. 2. We have heard learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and learned Govt. Pleader for the respondent. 3. The appellant, a grocery dealer, did not account the transaction of purchases from dealers in Tamil Nadu and consequently penalty was levied. In first revision, the Deputy Commissioner examined the case and found that in at least one case the appellant has made false statement, in as much as the appellant's letter accompanying the goods contained his usual signature. However, the Deputy Commissioner reduced the penalty on the ground that other cases do not stand established beyond doubt. Even though there is technical violation of Section 30B(4), we find that petitioner has admitted issuance of letters against every purchase order which used to MFA 1335/2000 -2- accompany the goods. All the vehicles used for transportation of goods from Tamil Nadu are registered in Kerala. The goods, the purchase of which was denied by the appellant and covered by bill No. No.383 dated 22.11.1988, was transported through the same truck which was used for transport of goods covered by bill dated 3.12.1988. Since the Deputy Commissioner found that at least in one transaction the appellant's denial was without bonafides and the transaction stands proved against him, we find no ground to interfere with the findings of the Commissioner, as there is evidence in the form of check post records regarding the purchase of goods from the dealers in Tamil Nadu. However, since the appellant started business only in the year for which penalty is levied, we feel that interest on penalty can be waived provided the balance penalty, if any, due is paid within two weeks from receipt of this judgment. The appeal is dismissed, but with a direction to the officer to accept the balance penalty, if any, due, without interest if payment is made bwithin the time stated above. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ MFA 1335/2000 -3- C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.F.A. No.1335 of 2000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 12th February, 2008.