High Court Kerala High Court

K.A.Sudhakaran vs Intelligence Officer on 28 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.A.Sudhakaran vs Intelligence Officer on 28 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 29784 of 2010(W)


1. K.A.SUDHAKARAN,KOTTARAM TRADERS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,SQUAD NO.11,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS),

3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(INT)

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :28/09/2010

 O R D E R
                   C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.

                -------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).No.29784 of 2010
                -------------------------------------------

         Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010


                        J U D G M E N T

———————-

Aggrieved by Ext.P2 order imposing penalty

under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003

(KVAT Act), the petitioner had preferred Ext.P3 appeal

before the 2nd respondent. Ext.P4 is the stay petition filed

along with the appeal.

2. At the time when the transport was detained, the

petitioner had furnished security by way of Bank Guarantee,

for release of the goods. When the respondent attempted to

encash the Bank Guarantee even without issuing a copy of

the order imposing penalty, the petitioner had approached

this court on an earlier occasion, and the encashment of

Bank Guarantee was restrained. According to the petitioner,

the Bank Guarantee in question is kept still alive. Under

such circumstances, the petitioner seeks direction for

disposal of the appeal on an early basis and till then to

restrain encashment of the Bank Guarantee.

3. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing for

W.P.(C).29784/10-W -2-

the respondents. Since the amount of penalty is fully secured by

way of Bank Guarantee furnished by the petitioner, I am of the

opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the

appellate authority to consider and pass orders on the appeal

and till then to restrain recovery of the amount covered under

the order imposing penalty.

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing

the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal

at the earliest possible, after affording an opportunity of hearing

to the petitioner, at any rate within a period of six weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

5. Till such time orders are passed by the 2nd respondent

as directed above, realisation of amount covered under Ext.P1

shall be kept in abeyance provided the petitioner keeps the Bank

Guarantee alive.

6. The petitioner will produce copy of this judgment

before the 2nd respondent.

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

okb