IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17415 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S. DINDIGAL STEEL ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., 4/608 B, PRECOT MILLS COLONY, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SRI.VINOD KUMAR P. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.T.G.ABHILASH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (KVAT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 17415 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 7th June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenging Exts. P1 to P4 assessment orders in respect of the months of April 2009 to July 2009, the petitioner filed Exts. P5 to P8 appeals along with Exts. P9 to P12 petitions for stay besides filing Exts. P13 to P16 petitions for early hearing. The grievance of the petitioner is that without properly adverting to the various grounds raised in the appeals, the applications for stay have been dismissed as per Ext. P17 common order holding that the petitioner failed to project a prima facie case, which hence is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well . 3. It is seen from Ext. P17 order passed by the appellate authority that the case projected by the petitioner has been considered, particularly with regard to the admission made by the petitioner as to the stock received from other States, which W.P.(C) No. 17415 OF 2010 2 was sold without any value addition and it was after considering the same that the assessing authority had added only 10% of the stock receipts towards freight & profit and a finding was entered that the addition made by the assessing authority was in accordance with the normal commercial principles and that there was no arbitrariness on the part of the assessing authority, thus dismissing the stay petitions. But then, the appeals are still pending and the petitioner is virtually prevented from proceeding with further course of action in accordance with law . 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that a final decision has to be rendered by the appellate authority in the appeals, taking note of all the grounds raised from the part of the petitioner. In the said circumstances, the second respondent is directed to consider and pass final orders on Exts. P5 to P8 appeals, in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment . It is made clear that all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P18 notice issued under Section 7 of the Revenue W.P.(C) No. 17415 OF 2010 3 Recovery Act shall be kept in abeyance till such time, on condition that the petitioner satisfies 50% of the liability shown therein and also furnishes security for the balance amount within two weeks. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk