IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 ST.Rev..No. 129 of 2010() ------------------------- TA.26/2009 of STAT ADDL.BENCH, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER ------------------------------ M/S.EMPEES MODERN RICE MILL, CHAMBAKKULAM, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE KURUVILLA(ALAPPUZHA) RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY G.P. SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... S.T. Rev. No.129 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The issues raised by the petitioner in this revision case is covered in petitioner's own case for another year vide judgment in EMPEES MODERN RICE MILLS VS. STATE OF KERALA reported in 2009 (4) KLT 433. The counsel for the petitioner contended that SLP filed before the Honourable Supreme Court is admitted and copy of the same is produced as Annexure-VI. However, we notice that Supreme Court has not granted stay against operation of judgment, if at all the same was prayed for. In the circumstances, we dismiss this S.T. revision case following the judgment referred above with a specific direction to the respondents to follow the judgment of the Supreme Court for this year also granting relief to the petitioner, if Supreme Court reverses or modifies judgment of this court. In other words, relief under the judgment of the Supreme Court should be rendered to the petitioner for this year i.e. 2004-2005 also, even without any necessity for the 2 petitioner to challenge this judgment. We also make it clear that if petitioner gets a stay for the year for which SLP is filed before the Supreme Court, that stay order with same conditions will operate for the year 2004-2005 also. However, there is no need for the respondent to wait for any Supreme Court order for recovery. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms