IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17481 of 2011(I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S.STEEL CRAFT INDUSTRIES,BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM,REP.BY ITS PARTNER MATHEW ALEXANDER. BY ADVS. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,SQUAD NO.III, DEPT.OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,ERNAKULAM 682 015. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,DEPT.OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, IST CIRCLE,KALAMASSERY 682 022. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), DEPT .OF COMMERCIAL TAX,DERNAKULAM,KOCHI 682 015. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDDIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.17481/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER DT. 21.2.2011. P2:- COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 27.4.2011. P3:- COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DTD. 18.5.2011. P4:- COPY OF THE CHALAN DTD. 13.6.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 17481 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Limited relief sought for in this writ petition is to direct the 2nd respondent to accept Bank Guarantee as security for the balance amount as stipulated in Ext.P3 order. Against Ext.P1 order of penalty the petitioner had preferred statutory appeal before the 3rd respondent. Ext.P3 is the interim order issued by the appellate authority granting stay subject to condition of the petitioner depositing 40% of the amount in dispute and on furnishing security deposit for the balance amount. 2. According to the petitioner, eventhough the amount stipulated in Ext.P3 has already been paid and a security bond was furnished with respect to the balance amount, the 2nd respondent is threatening with coercive steps of recovery on the premise that the petitioner has not furnished solvency certificate along with the security bond. Under such premise, in order to avoid any coercive steps of recovery, the petitioner is offering to furnish bank guarantee for the balance amount. WP(C) .17481/2011 2 3. On considering the averments made as stated above, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if the respondents are restrained from proceeding with further steps of recovery till the disposal of the appeal, if the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee for the balance amount. 4. Therefore there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to accept Bank Guarantee in lieu of the security bond stipulated in Ext.P3 interim order of the appellate authority. If such Bank Guarantee is furnished within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered as due compliance of Ext.P3 order. 5. If the Bank Guarantee as directed above is furnished, then the 3rd respondent shall consider and dispose of the appeal (Ext. P2) after affording an opportunity of hearing as early as possible, at any rate within two months thereof. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) .17481/2011 3