IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35391 of 2010(Y) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- E.J.DAVIS, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. VEMBANAD TOURIST HOME, OPP: KSRTC BUS STATION, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 141. BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.V, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, COCHIN-682 015. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, VAIKOM-686 141. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALA-680 575. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.35391 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Aggrieved by Ext.P5 order imposing penalty under Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (KGST Act) the petitioner had preferred Ext.P6 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner had filed Ext.P7 application seeking an early hearing of the appeal. It is stated that the petitioner had also filed stay petition along with the appeal. According to the petitioner, the appeal as well as the accompanying applications are pending consideration and disposal before the 2nd respondent. Since coercive steps of recovery is threatened pending disposal of the appeal, this writ petition is filed. 2. Contention of the petitioner is the order issued under Section 45A is totally unsustainable in view of Ext.P9 order issued by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kottayam in T.A.272/08, 40/09 and C.O.No.1/09, which pertains to orders imposed against the petitioner for the previous periods. 3. Considering pendency of the matter before the W.P.(C).35391/10 -2- statutory appellate authority, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing that authority to consider the matter expeditiously. 4. Under the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider and pass orders either on Ext.P6 appeal or on the application for stay filed along with that appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that the 2nd respondent shall take note of Ext.P9 order issued by the Tribunal with respect to penalty imposed for the previous years, while considering the issue. 5. Till such time orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above, coercive steps for recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P5 shall be kept in abeyance. 6. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb