R.Shyal vs Commercial Tax Officer on 23 December, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 37547 of 2009(K)


1. R.SHYAL, PROPRIETOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KARUNAGAPPALLY.
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),

3. VILLAGE OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.I.SAGEER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :23/12/2009

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

                     ------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).No.37547 OF 2009
                     ------------------------------

          Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009


                         J U D G M E N T

———————-

1. Through Ext.P4 order the petitioner was imposed with

penalty to the tune of Rs.51,71,340/- under Section 9(2) of the

Central Sales Tax Act read with Section 67(1) of the Kerala Value

Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). Ext.P4 order is dated 3.4.2009.

Coercive steps of recovery have now been initiated to realise the

amounts covered under Ext.P4 as evidenced from Ext.P6 notice

issued under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.

It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner had already

filed statutory appeal against Ext.P4 and such appeal is pending

consideration and disposal before the appellate authority. But

the petitioner has not produced copy of such appeal nor the

appellate authority is impleaded in this writ petition.

2. Since the petitioner has got an effective remedy by

way of appeal as provided under the statute, this writ petition

cannot be entertained on merits. If statutory appeal filed against

Ext.P4 is pending before the appropriate authority, the petitioner

had to seek necessary interim reliefs from that authority, by

moving appropriate interlocutory applications.

W.P.(C).37547/09-K 2

3. Having confronted with the above situation the

petitioner sought indulgence of this court to direct respondents

to keep in abeyance coercive steps of recovery for a short period

in order to facilitate him to approach the appellate authority,

seeking appropriate interim relief.

4. Therefore the writ petition is dismissed without

prejudice to rights of the petitioner to approach the appellate

authority seeking appropriate interim reliefs. The respondents

are directed to keep in abeyance coercive steps of recovery

initiated pursuant to Ext.P6 for a period of one month from

today, in order to facilitate the petitioner to move before the

appellate authority seeking appropriate interim reliefs.

5. Needless to say that the appellate authority

concerned, if approached through interim applications in a

properly constituted appeal, shall consider and dispose of the

same without any further delay, at any rate within a period of

one month from the date of filing of such application.

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

okb