IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19235 of 2006(M)
1. M/S.EID PARRY (INDIA) LIMITED,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) I,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
For Petitioner :SRI.JOSE JOSEPH
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :08/02/2011
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
..............................................................................
W.P.(C) No. 19235 OF 2006
.........................................................................
Dated this the 8th February , 2011
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this court with the following
prayers:
“i) Call for the records of the case leading to
Ext. P1 order so far as it relates to levy of interest,
Ext. P2 proceedings and Exts.P3 & P5 orders from
the respondents and quash the same by the issue
of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ
or order.
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or order directing the 1st
respondent to refund the amount already paid
towards interest demanded under Ext. P2,
iii) pass such other orders, directions, or
writs as may be prayed for and this Hon’ble Court
may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case. “
2. The crucial question to be considered in the Writ Petition
W.P.(C) No. 19235 OF 2006
2
is with regard to the sustainability of the proceedings taken by
the concerned respondents with regard to levy of interest under
Section 23(3) and 23(3A) of the KGST Act. The learned
Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that
the challenge against the provisions has already been answered
against the assessee, as per the decision reported in 2010(1)
KLT 786 (State of Kerala vs. Western India Cosmetic and
Health Products Ltd.).
In the said circumstances, nothing further remains to be
considered in this Writ Petition and the same is dismissed
accordingly.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
lk