IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2009 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6958 of 2009(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- M/S. SOLAR INDUSTRIES CHARITABLE SOCIETY, Q.607/93, PEROOR, TKMC PO, KOLLAM, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT ANIL KUMAR T. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR. 2. THE PROJECT OFFICER, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KUNDARA. 4. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R.), KOLLAM. ADDL.5. THE SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (ADDITIONAL R5 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 12.3.2009) R1, R2, R5 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.K.P.HARISH. R3, R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.6958 of 2009-L ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Exts.P6 and P6a which are demand notices issued under the Revenue Recovery Act for recovering tax dues. Petitioner seeks a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to issue certificate certifying that the petitioner unit is an approved village industry under the Board and a direction to keep in abeyance Exts.P6 and P6(a). Briefly put the case of the petitioner is that petitioner is a registered charitable society. It has availed a loan. It is a village industry and is entitled for exemption from tax. It is stated that assessments were completed for two years on the basis that there is no exemption. According to the petitioner, petitioner made application for issuance of certificates which has not been granted. The first appellate authority confirmed the assessment. Petitioner has now filed second appeal and an application for stay is also filed. But, revenue recovery proceedings are issued, and, therefore, petitioner approached this court. WPC No. 6958/2009 -2- 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and also learned standing counsel for respondents 1,2 and 5. Learned standing counsel submits that actually petitioner was not issued with certificates as claimed. Amounts are due and unless some amount is given, under the Rules certificates cannot be given. He submits that petitioner has not even filed the application as alleged. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: If the petitioner makes an application within one week from today before the 5th respondent, the 5th respondent will consider the same and decide the matter of issuance of certificates for the years 1999-2000 and 2000- 2001 within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of the application. It is open to the petitioner to produce all such documents as according to it will suffice for the issuance of the certificates. Recovery proceedings pursuant to Exts.P6 and P6 (a) will be kept in abeyance for a period of five weeks from today. If the certificates are issued by the 5th respondent, the petitioner may produce the certificates before WPC No. 6958/2009 -3- the Appellate Tribunal and take appropriate steps seeking orders on the application for stay. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS