IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6003 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- UNITED SPIRITS LTD, UNIT PALAKKAD, K.PUDUR, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD, REP.BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER MR.V.RAGHUNATH. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS SRI.M.P.VINOD RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER IB, MATTANCHERRY, O/O.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(INT.) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MINI CIVIL STATION, ALWAYE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES(APPEALS), ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.6003 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the coercive steps being pursued by the respondents in the course of realisation of the amount stated to be due by way of penalty without any regard to the pendency of the appeals and the interlocutory applications for stay before the second respondent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on Ext.P8 judgment passed by this Court in a similar case whereby the appellate authority was directed to consider and finalise the appeal on merits within a specified time and simultaneously intercepting the coercive proceedings in the meanwhile. 3. The learned Government Pleader referring to Ext.P1 order passed by the first respondent imposing the penalty submits that the liability to pay the tax in respect of the entire W.P.(C) No.6003 of 2010 - 2 - turnover has become final by virtue of the authoritative pronouncement of law by the apex Court on the point. It is also submitted that there is no dispute that a sum of Rs.52,07,360/- was set off in respect of the cash discount at the rate of 2%, which however was observed as not substantiated with reference to any legally acceptable evidence and hence treated as 'suppression' of turnover, inviting further consequences as shown in Ext.P1. 4. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that the disputed questions of fact have to be adjudicated by the appellate authority after considering the entire facts and circumstances and also the relevant provisions of law. 5. Accordingly, following the course as already taken by way of Ext.P8 judgment, this Court directs the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P4, P5 and P6 appeals in accordance with law, of course, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as W.P.(C) No.6003 of 2010 - 3 - expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that till appropriate orders are passed as above, all further coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge vns