High Court Kerala High Court

P.K.Sulaiman vs Intelligence Inspector on 28 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
P.K.Sulaiman vs Intelligence Inspector on 28 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 38714 of 2010(L)


1. P.K.SULAIMAN, PROPRIETOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.V,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.HARIHARAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :28/12/2010

 O R D E R
                        C.K.ABDUL RAHIM, J
                     -----------------------------------
                      W.P.(C) No.38714 OF 2010
           --------------------------------------------------------
         DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010



                             JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by order imposing penalty under Section

47(6) of the KVAT Act (Kerala Value Added Tax Act), the

petitioner had preferred Ext.P2 statutory appeal before the

2nd respondent, along with the appeal, Ext.P3 stay petition

was also filed. According to the petitioner, the appeal and

stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before

the 2nd respondent. Meanwhile, the petitioner is aggrieved

by coercieve steps of recovery initiated on the basis of

Ext.P4 notice. Hence, the petitioner seeks direction to

restrain the recovery steps, till the disposal of the appeal.

2. Heard, learned Government Pleader on behalf of

respondent. Considering pendency of the matter before the

statutory appellate authority, I am of the view that, the writ

petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary direction to

the authority.

3. Accordingly, the second respondent or the

W.P.(C) No.38714 /2010
2

competent appellate authority is directed to consider and

pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, if the appeal is already

registered before that authority and the same is in order,

after affording an opportunity of hearing the petitioner, as

early as possible, at any rate within one month from the

date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.

4. Till such time, orders are issued by the 2nd

respondent as directed above, recovery of the amount of

penalty, which is initiated on the basis of Ext.P4 notice shall

be kept in abeyance.

The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment

before the 2nd respondent.

Sd/-

(C.K.ABDUL RAHIM)
JUDGE

ss/-

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge