IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2009 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7734 of 2009(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.HINDUSTAN PLYWOOD, MUDICKAL, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,M.K.SHOUKATH. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB), COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY AT EDAPPALLY. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IST CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 7734 OF 2009 J ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 12th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P4 penalty order. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.Bobby John and learned Government Pleader. 3. According to the petitioner, the matter relates to C-Forms. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has produced C-Forms to the extent they were available. He also submits that as per law, C-Forms can be produced before the appellate authority and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be called upon to pay penalty. The petitioner also relies on the judgment of Madras High Court in Sree Murugan Engineering Products Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Coimbatore [2006 (148) STC 419]. Having heard the case, I am of the view that the petitioner can be relegated to pursue the statutory remedy. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy. Further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 will be kept in abeyance for a period of one month. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks