IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2010 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 8383 of 2010(W) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ GREAVES COTTON LIMITED, 39/6636, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN – 682 015, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER (PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATION) MR. T. KRISHNA MOORTHY. BY ADV. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.K.JOHN MATHAI, MR.P.BENNY THOMAS, MR.P.GOPINATH, MR.RAJAKANNAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,TAXES DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ASSESSMENT) SPECIAL CIRCLE-II, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R. RAMACHANDRAMENON, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.8383 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The only grievance projected in the writ petition is that, the petitioner wants to avail the statutory remedy by way of revision before the this Court, against Ext.P5 order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT), for which some breathing time is sought for. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order was passed on 30th of January 2010 and that the same was communicated to the petitioner only on 5.3.2010, as borne by the seal affixed thereon. Even otherwise, it is very much evident from the last page of Ext.P5, that the order was 'compared' and necessary 'checking' was conducted by the staff of the Tribunal only on 22.2.2010. This being the position, it is the contention of the petitioner that, the petitioner is having sufficient time of 90 days to prefer such revision before this Court, which will W.P.(C) No.8383 of 2010 -2- expire only on 3.6.2010. The grievance is that the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P6, even without waiting for the appeal period, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances as discernible from the materials on record, this Court permits the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy, if so decided, within the prescribed time. It is made clear that, till such statutory period is over, no recovery proceedings shall be pursued against the petitioner, pursuant to Ext.P6. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON (JUDGE) nl