IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19235 of 2006(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.EID PARRY (INDIA) LIMITED, KOTTAYAM, REP. BY GOPAKUMAR.R., SENIOR EXECUTIVE-TAXATION. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) I, SPECIAL CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. K.P. BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 19235 of 2006(M) APPENDIX PPETITIONER'S EXHIBITS. EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER THE KGST ACT FOR THE YEAR 2001-02. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST R ESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT IN respondent .69/03. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. R3.37318/04/CT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 19235 OF 2006 ......................................................................... Dated this the 8th February , 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this court with the following prayers: “i) Call for the records of the case leading to Ext. P1 order so far as it relates to levy of interest, Ext. P2 proceedings and Exts.P3 & P5 orders from the respondents and quash the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 1st respondent to refund the amount already paid towards interest demanded under Ext. P2, iii) pass such other orders, directions, or writs as may be prayed for and this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. ” 2. The crucial question to be considered in the Writ Petition W.P.(C) No. 19235 OF 2006 2 is with regard to the sustainability of the proceedings taken by the concerned respondents with regard to levy of interest under Section 23(3) and 23(3A) of the KGST Act. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the challenge against the provisions has already been answered against the assessee, as per the decision reported in 2010(1) KLT 786 (State of Kerala vs. Western India Cosmetic and Health Products Ltd.). In the said circumstances, nothing further remains to be considered in this Writ Petition and the same is dismissed accordingly. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk