IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2008 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30608 of 2008(R) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MLAMALLAY TEA ESTATES LTD., KACHERIKADAVU, KOTTAYAM. REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI.EAPEN JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & SALEX TAX, KOTTAYAM. 2. ASST.COMMISSIONER(KVAT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 30608 OF 2008 R -------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd October, 2008 JUDGMENT Complaint of petitioner is that petitioner is entitled to refund, and that it is also entitled to eligible interest on refund as directed in Ext.P1 Judgment. 2. Petitioner was given a refund voucher for presentation before the Sub Treasury Officer, Ernakulam. It was revalidated and it was presented to the Sub Treasury Officer, Ernakulam. Ext.P2 objection slip was issued by the Treasury Officer. Petitioner filed Ext.P3. Complaint is that neither the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner nor the Assistant Commissioner has cared to rectify the defects and issue refund voucher in the proper form. It is further stated that eligible interest is also not given as per Ext.P1. 3. I heard Shri Ramesh Cheriyan John, learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that there has to be WPC. 30608/08 R 2 counter-signature by the second respondent. He submits that if the petitioner approaches the respondents, the needful will be done. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: If the petitioner approaches the respondents, the needful in accordance with law will be done, so that the petitioner is in a position to claim the benefit of refund, which shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date on which the petitioner approaches the respondents. If the petitioner represents before the second respondent in regard to its claim for interest in terms of Ext.P1 Judgment, the second respondent will consider and take a decision thereon within one month from the date of filing the representation. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge