IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2008 / 10TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3472 of 2008(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S.GODREJ & BOYCE MFG.CO.LTD. NO.9/418, NEAR INFO PARK, EDACHIRA, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DT., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH COMMERCIAL MANAGER AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR.P.RAGHAVAN. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (AUDIT ASSESSMENT), O/O DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(AA), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 3472 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: January 30, 2008 JUDGMENT Exts.P1 and P2 are the assessment orders issued under the KVAT and CST Acts. Petitioner has filed Exts.P4 and P5 appeals. Along with the appeals, petitioner has also filed Exts.P6 and P7 delay petitions, Exts.P8 and P9 early hearing petitions and Ext.P10 stay petition in Ext.P4 appeal. The petitioner submits that while so, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated and refers to Ext.P11 notice issued for realising the tax due under the KVAT Act. In view of all these, the writ petition has been filed challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner. Although the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the major dispute concerns the High Seas Sales which is clarified in Ext.P13 order and that the stock transfer is also explained by the petitioner by producing the documents, I am not inclined to adjudicate on the merits of the claim that are raised by the petitioner at this stage. In my view these are matters to be WP(C) 3472/2008 Page numbers considered by the Appellate Authority. 2. At this stage I am only concerned about the recovery proceedings that are initiated during the pendency of the matter before the Appellate Authority. Now that by Ext.P11 revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated for realising the tax due under the KVAT Act, I direct that the Appellate Authority shall take up and consider Ext.P10 stay petition filed by the petitioner in Ext.P4 appeal. This shall be done by the Appellate Authority as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. In the meantime, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P11 will stand deferred for a period of six weeks from today. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-