IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2011 / 5TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1650 of 2011(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S.K.K.PLASTCIS, 1/86M, DEVELOPMENT AREA, ERUMATHALA, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY THE PARTNER, K.K.IBRAHIM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.THANU PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, FIRST CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR SALES TAX EXEMPTION REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, PERUMBAVOOR. 5. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P. PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------------ WP (C) No. 1650 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a partnership firm which is a registered dealer both, under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner has applied for sales tax exemption in terms of the notification issued in SRO No. 1729/93 read with SRO No. 1092/99. The 2nd respondent rejected the said claim of exemption. Ultimately, the matter was taken up in an appeal. The 3rd respondent as per Exhibit P11 order rejected the appeal. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred Exhibit P13 review petition along with Exhibit P14 application for stay. They are still pending consideration before the 3rd respondent. In the meanwhile, the respondents 4 and 5 are taking steps to recover assessed tax along with interest, demanded for the years for 2001-02 till 2004-05, as evident from Exhibits P19 to P22. It is in the said circumstance, that this writ petition has been filed by petitioner. WP (C) No.1650 of 2011 2 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. 3. Evidently, Exhibit P13 review petition/ rectification application submitted by the petitioner against Exhibit P11 is pending consideration before the 3rd respondent. In the said circumstance, I do not think it necessary to consider the contentions raised in the writ petition on merits at this stage. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P13 review petition/rectification application in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed on Exhibit P13 recovery pursuant to Exhibit P19 to P22 shall be kept in abeyance. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. rkc