IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4316 of 2011(L) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- DEEPTHY AGENCIES, COTTON MILL ROAD, THIRUVANNUR, CALICUT, BY MOIDEEN KOYA, MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, III CIRCLE, CALICUT-673006. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), CALICUT-673006. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CALICUT-673006. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.4316 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- With respect to the year 2005-06, assessment was completed against the petitioner, as per Ext.P1 order. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 the petitioner 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 the amount of tax in dispute, on issuing revenue recovery notice as per Ext.P4, without considering pendency of the appeal. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to keep in abeyance recovery steps till the disposal of the appeal. 2. It is submitted that the only dispute in the appeal pertains to rate of tax applicable for 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 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 W.P.(C).4316/11 -2- that this court had granted stay in many other cases, against recovery of the tax amounts in dispute, pending disposal of such appeals subject to 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 now sought to be recovered 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. Needless to say that the prohibitory orders if any issued to the Banks shall be lifted in the meanwhile and the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the Bank Account. 6. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb