IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2008 / 12TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 28656 of 2001(J) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ G. VENKITESWARI, W/O. LATE K.V. GOVINDARAJ, X/2A, PUDUR ROAD, KOZHINJAMBARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN SRI.P.A.NOOR MUHAMMED RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ADDL. SALES TAX OFFICER, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.P. PRADEEP THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER ON CMP 46656 OF 2001 IN OP 28656 OF 2001 DISMISSED 2.1.2008 SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 1996-97 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 1997-98 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 1998-99 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE BEARING NO. C.5-85/2000 FOR RS. 48455/-. EXT.P5 SERIES TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT CASH RECEIPTS IN PAYMENT OF RS. 56,365/-. EXT.P6 SERIES TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT CASH RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF RS. 42,017/-. EXT.P7 SERIES TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT CASH RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF RS. 28243/-. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- O.P. NO. 28656 OF 2001 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging levy of interest under Section 23(3) of the KGST Act under three assessment orders produced as Exts. P1 to P3. Besides this, petitioner is questioning the retention of collection charges by the Tahsildar for the amounts paid by the petitioner in instalments. So far as challenge against interest is concerned, I do not think petitioner can succeed because the defaulter failed to pay admitted tax along with returns. Interest under Section 23(3) is payable for delay in payment of any tax due under the Act. Tax payable along with returns is tax due under the Act and if it is not paid in terms of Rule 21(7) of the KGST Rules, then it amounts to default, which attracts interest. Therefore demand of interest under Section 23(3) of the KGST Act for non-payment of admitted tax is perfectly in order. So far as the challenge against adjustment of collection charges is concerned, I feel petitioner is entitled to succeed because receipts produced in Court show that petitioner has made payments voluntarily 2 in instalments though after initiation of revenue recovery proceedings. In the circumstances, there will be direction to the second respondent to adjust the collection charges retained towards sales tax arrears and forward the payment to the first respondent immediately on production of a copy of this judgment. If there is any balance payable by the petitioner, then such amount can be recovered from the petitioner along with collection charges, unless it is paid by the petitioner. O.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge 3