IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).NO. 7 OF 2011(A) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MS. SMART LINE DISTRIBUTORS, ARTHUNKAL, CHERTHALA, REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER, MICHAEL K.ROCKY. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH, SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER-I, CHERTHALA-688 524. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE, KOLLAM- 690 509. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- With respect to the period from May 2009 to February 2010, assessment was completed against the petitioner as per Ext.P1 order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner had filed statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent, as per Ext.P2. Stay petition, as per Ext.P3, was also filed along with the appeal. It is stated that the 2nd respondent has not yet considered either the appeal or the stay application. Grievance of the petitioner is that recovery steps are now being proceeded against, for realising amounts of tax in dispute, on the basis of revenue recovery notice issued as per Ext.P4, without considering pendency of the appeal. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to keep in abeyance the recovery steps till disposal of the appeal. 2. It is submitted that the only dispute in the appeal pertains to rate of tax applicable with respect to the products, “Ujala Supreme” and “Ujala Stiff & Shine” dealt with by the petitioner. It is further submitted that the question is now pending consideration in various other cases filed by the W.P.(C).7/2011 -2- manufacturer as well as other dealers, awaiting decision on the issue from the Hon'ble Supreme Court and from this court. It is pointed out that this court had granted stay in many other cases, against recovery of tax amounts in dispute, pending disposal of such appeals, on condition of payment of 1/3rd of the amounts. Hence I am of the opinion that a similar relief can be granted in this case also. 3. In the result the 2nd respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. Realisation of amounts covered under Ext.P1 order, which is initiated through Ext.P4 notice, shall be kept in abeyance on condition of the petitioner remitting 1/3rd of the tax amount in dispute and also on furnishing security bond for the balance amount, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb