IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA No. 2426 of 2007()
1. T.S.VASUDEVAN, AGED 59 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER
3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR)
4. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :30/11/2007
O R D E R
H.L. DATTU, CJ. & K. M. JOSEPH, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W. A. NO. 2426 OF 2007
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th November, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L. DATTU, CJ.
Questioning the correctness or otherwise of the order passed by the learned
Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.36021/04 dated 6.11.2006, the petitioner is before us in
this Writ Appeal.
2. In the Writ Petition filed, the petitioner had called in question Exts.P1 and
P3 notices issued by respondents 2 and 3 respectively, to recover a sum of
Rs.4,27,355/=.
3. The learned Single Judge by Order dated 6.11.2006 has rejected the Writ
Petition.
4. The matter is now posted for Admission before us. By consent of both the
learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
5. After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the appellant
brings to our notice the Affidavit filed by the appellant before this court dated
28.11.2007, wherein the appellant has undertaken that he shall pay the quantified
tax liability in eight instalments. The Affidavit filed by the appellant reads as under:
“I, T.S. Vasudevan, S/o. Subramanian, aged 59 years,
Thaiparambath House, Kodungallur, do hereby solemnly affirm
and state as follows:
1. I am the appellant in the above Writ Appeal and I know
the facts of the case.
2. The above Writ Appeal is filed challenging the
Judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C). No.36021/2004.
The said W.P.(C). is filed to quash Ext.P1 demand notice issued
by the Asst. Excise Commissioner, Palakkad.
W.A. NO.2426/07 2
3. By Ext.P1, the Department had sought to recover the
interest on the Additional Tax for transportation of toddy alleging
that there is a mistake in levying the tax. The learned Single
Judge passed the impugned Judgment directing issuance of fresh
demand notice deducting Rs.3353/= and recalculating the interest
on the balance tax. This Judgment is challenged in the present
Writ Appeal.
4. It is submitted that I am not an Abkari business man,
but a licensed document writer. I am not in a position to pay the
huge amount demanded as per Ext.P1 in lump.
5. I undertake to pay the amount demanded as per Ext.P1
if I am given sufficient time to pay the amount. I am not in a
position to raise the entire amount in lump. I undertake that if I am
given 8 instalments, I will be able to pay the entire amount
demanded as per Ext.P1. Hence it is in the interest of justice that
I may be permitted to pay the amount as demanded as per Ext.P1
in 8 instalments.
All the facts stated above are true.
Dated this 28th day of November, 2007.”
6. Appellant pleads his financial inability to pay the entire amount. He
requests us to grant instalment facility. In our view, in so far as tax liability is
concerned, we are not inclined to grant any instalment facility, but in so far as
interest for belated payment of tax is concerned, if some instalment facility is
granted, in our opinion, it would not cause any prejudice to the respondents.
7. Accordingly, we pass the following:
Order
(1) The Writ Appeal is disposed of.
(2) The Affidavit filed by the appellant is placed on record.
(3) The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.1,81,853/- which represents the
tax for the assessment year in question, within one month from today.
(4) After the appellant deposits the quantified tax liability, the respondents
shall re-calculate the interest payable by the appellant and issue a fresh
demand notice for payment of interest. After service of such demand
notice, the appellant shall pay the quantified interest liability in eight
equal monthly instalments.
W.A. NO.2426/07 3
(5) If, for any reason, the appellant commits any default in payment of the
amount as directed by us, the respondents are at liberty to initiate
appropriate proceedings to recover the entire amount due from the
appellant.
(6) The Appellant shall not seek for extension of time to make payments as
directed by us.
Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE
K.M. JOSEPH,
JUDGE
kbk/DK.