IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2009 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 36208 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------- K.K. PARAMESWARAN, PROPRIETOR, GOPIKA REGENCY, VARAPPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM. 3. INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.36208 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P9 interlocutory order passed by the 2nd respondent on a stay petition filed along with the appeal, filed against imposition of penalty under Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (KGST Act). After adverting to the contentions in the appeal, the appellate authority found that the penalty is imposed solely on the allegation that the tax amount was not paid within the stipulated time. It is found that the petitioner had already remitted the tax, eventhough not at the time when notice intimating the proposal was issued. Further it is found that there is no reasoning mentioned by the assessing authority for adopting maximum penalty to the extent of double the amount of tax. Considering all these aspects the appellate authority has taken a very lenient view while granting interim stay and an amount of Rs.50,000/- only was directed to be paid against the total penalty of Rs.4,83,124/-, which is now due along with interest. I do not find any reason to interfere with the condition imposed under Ext.P9 which is fixed in exercise of the discretion W.P.(C).36208/09-U 2 vested upon the appellate authority. No illegality, irregularity or impropriety can be attributed against Ext.P9 order. Therefore the writ petition deserves no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. 2. However, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the time stipulated for payment under Ext.P9 is expiring and hence seeks for an extension of the period. Considering the facts and circumstances, the time stipulated for compliance of the condition in Ext.P9 is hereby extended for a further period of three weeks from today. 3. If the payment of the amount is effected, the 2nd respondent shall consider and dispose of the appeal at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of such payment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb