IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7151 of 2009(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K.JAYADEVAN,AGED 62, C/O.KUNJUKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT VINAYAKA, PANGAPPARA,TRIVANDRUM, PROPRIETOR,HOTEL GREEN PALACE, SREEKARIAM,TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ SRI.ANOOP JOSEPH SRI.ABHILASH AKBAR SRI.T.B.SIVAPRASAD RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUARD NO.IV,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.7151 of 2009-L ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P10. Ext.P10 is an order passed by the appellate authority granting stay on condition that the appellant pays Rs.5,00,000/- from the disputed tax (penalty) of Rs.10,55,520/-. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. According to the petitioner, the maximum penalty that can be levied is Rs.10,000/-. It is submitted that there is no basis for imposition of condition and that there was no reason for refusing unconditional stay. It is stated that the order only narrates the contentions of the petitioner and the finding of the 5th respondent in the penalty order. 2. In Ext.P10 after referring to the contentions of the petitioner and referring to the order of the officer it is stated that further verification of the records recovered during the inspection clearly revealed that the dealer received more consideration than what was conceded by the dealer in sales WPC No. 7151/2009 -2- turnover conceded. 3. Having considered the matter I think that interest of justice would be met if Ext.P10 order is modified and petitioner is called upon to pay 1/3rd of the amount and furnishes security for the balance. It is ordered accordingly. Petitioner is granted two weeks time to comply with the conditions as modified. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS