N.J.James vs The Inspecting … on 30 January, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3001 of 2010(A)


1. N.J.JAMES, PROPRIETOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, VAIKOM,

3. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,

4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER APPEALS,

5. SECRETARY, KVAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

6. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.K.SREEJITH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :30/01/2010

 O R D E R
                    P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
                   ---------------------------
                       W.P(C) No.3001 of 2010-A
                  ----------------------------
             Dated this the 30th day of January, 2010.

                            J U D G M E N T

Challenging Ext.P3 order imposing penalty under Section 67(1)

of the KVAT Act passed by the second respondent, the petitioner

filed an appeal before the fourth respondent, who considered and

finalised the proceedings, modifying the penalty and reducing the

same by nearly 50%, as borne by Ext.P4. The case of the petitioner

is that the petitioner wants to challenge the order by filing second

appeal before the Tribunal and that earnest efforts are being

pursued in this regard. It is in the meanwhile that the respondents

have proceeded with coercive steps and issued Ext.P6 demand

notice under the Revenue Recovery Act, which is sought to be

intercepted in this Writ Petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Ext.P4 order passed by the fourth respondent is obviously

dtd.15.6.2009 and that the same was served on the petitioner only

on 19.8.2009. This by itself shows that the petitioner was simply

sleeping over the issue and this Court does not find any merits in

W.P(C) No.3001 of 2010-A 2

the submission now put forth by the petitioner. However taking

note of the submission made by the petitioner that the petitioner

wants to avail the statutory remedy by way of second appeal, also

filing necessary applications to condone the delay and such other

I.As for incidental reliefs further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P6

shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE

//True Copy//
P.A to Judge

ab