IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17685 of 2009(E)
1. SEVEN SEAS DISTILLERY LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB),
... Respondent
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ASSESSMENT),
3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS),
4. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.V.ASOKAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :29/06/2009
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P. (C) No. 17685 of 2009
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 29th day of June, 2009
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, aggrieved of the orders imposing penalty with
respect to the assessment years 2005 – ’06, 2006 – ’07 and 2007 – ’08
as borne by Ext.P2, P2(a) and P2(b) passed by the first respondent,
has challenged the same by filing Exts. P4, P4(a) and P4(b) appeals,
along with Exts.P5, P5(a) and P5(b) petitions for stay, before the third
respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite satisfying
the entire tax liability and interest and in spite of the fact that the
petitioner cannot effect any sale of liquor to a private party but to the
Governmental/such other authorities who are specifically entrusted with
the task, the respondents are causing the machinery under the Kerala
Revenue Recovery Act to be turned against the petitioner, as evident
from Exts.P6, P6(a) and P6(b), without any regard to the pendency of
the proceedings before the appellate authority, which hence is sought
to be interfered in the present Writ Petition.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of
the respondents as well.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the third respondent
is hereby directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5,
P5(a) and P5(b) petitions for stay within one month. It is also made
WP (C) No. 17685 of 2009
: 2 :
clear that, the statutory appeals preferred by the petitioner (Ext.P4
series) shall be considered on merits and finalized in accordance with
law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months from thereafter. It
is made clear that, till such appropriate orders are passed on the
petitions for stay as aforesaid, all further coercive steps being pursued
against the petitioner, pursuant to Ext.P6 series, shall be kept in
abeyance.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
kmd