IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 30222 of 2008(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S.RAY CONSTRUCTIONS LTD, RAY BHAVAN, N.H.BYE PASS, THYKOODAM, ERNAKULAM.KOCHI-19, REPRESENTED BY K.R.VIJAYAKUMAR, SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT), K V A T, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA , REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, KERALA GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.3.BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., KOCHI REFINERY, P.B.NO.2, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-682 302. (ADDITIONAL 3RD RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17.12.2008 IN IA NO.15937/2008) R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN. R3 BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR. SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR FOR ADDL.R3 SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI FOR ADDL.R3 SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS FOR ADDL.R3 SRI.ANIL D. NAIR FOR ADDL.R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/04/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 33222 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 30222 of 2008-W & W.P.(C) No.33222 of 2008-E ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 2nd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T The issue raised in these writ petitions relates to demanding enhanced rate (8%) for compounding. According to the petitioner, in cases where contracts were entered prior to the introduction of enhanced rate, compounding at 4% will continue as compounding is allowed contract-wise and not year-wise. Learned Government Pleader would point out that Finance Bill Act, 2008 provides for compounding facility at 4% in cases like the present till the contract is over or till 31.3.2009 whichever is earlier. I record this submission and dispose of the writ petition. I make it clear that it will be without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to call in question the provision as aforesaid. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS