IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6376 of 2008(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ TAJ RESIDENCY, KOZHIKODE-673 032, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, MR.P.RADHAKRISHNAN. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENT: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY G.P. SHRI.TEC CHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.66376 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T It is admitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the issue involved in this writ petition is covered against the petitioner by the decision of this court in Casino Hotel V. State of Kerala reported in (2007) 15 KTR 485. However, the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of paragraph 6 of the said judgment, which reads thus: “6. Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that interest under Section 10 is demanded from the end of relevant year and not for the period of default after arrears fell due after services of notice of demand. On going through Section 10, I find interest can be demanded for the period of default which obviously means default in payment after expiry of the date provided for payment under notice of demand served along with assessment orders. The assessing officer is directed to revise demand of interest for the actual period of default and recover interest only for such period.” 2. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The contention of the petitioner on the issue raised in the writ petition is repelled following the above said judgment. However, it is clarified that the petitioner would also be entitled w.p.c.6376/08 2 to the same benefit as in paragraph 6 of the said judgment in respect of the demand for interest. However, the above said direction on interest will not be applicable to the assessment order for the year 2000-2001. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge