Wp(C)/30888/2007 Of P.c.thahir v. Agricultural Incometax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2007 / 26TH ASWINA 1929 WP(C).No. 30888 of 2007(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- P.C. THAHIR, PROPRIETOR, KANHIRANDY TRADERS, S. BATTERY. BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN SRI.P.RAGHUNATH RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. AGRL. INCOME TAX & COM. TAX OFFICER, S. BATTERY. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DIST. INDUSTRIES CENTRE, WAYANAD AT KALPETTA. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE. 4. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER, WAYANAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =W.P.(C) No. 30888 OF 2007 B= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18[th] October, 2007 J U D G M E N T Following Ext. P1 order of exemption, theassessment in respect of 1999-2000 was completed asper Ext. P2. However, that was cancelled by Ext. P4order of the 3[rd] respondent exercising powers underSection 35 of the KGST Act. It is thereafter that there-assessment was completed as per Ext. P6. In Ext. P6towards balance tax and surcharge due the liability ofthe petitioner has been quantified at Rs.8,81,233/- andthe interest at Rs.12,77,788/-. Though the petitionerhas filed an appeal against Ext. P6 before theappellate authority, petitioner has not moved any stayapplication. Now by Ext. P7 the amount due in terms ofExt. P6 is sought to be realised and hence this writpetition. 2. While the counsel for the writ petitionersubmits that Ext. P4 and consequentially Ext. P6 aroseout of a modification of Ext. P1 and that there is nodelay on their side to be levied interest, I am not WPC No. 30888/07 -2- finally deciding the matter since the appeal is pendingbefore the appellate authority. It is for thatauthority to deal with the contentions and decide theissue. The only question that is relevant now iswhether the respondents should be allowed to realisethe amount by recourse to revenue recovery proceedings. 3. Now that the liability of the petitioner hasbeen quantified in Ext. P6 the petitioner shall remitthe full amount of tax as quantified therein. In sofar as interest is concerned, there will be a stay ofrecovery of the interest portion contained in Ext. P6,on the petitioner remitting 50% thereof. On suchdeposit the appellate authority shall consider anddispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible.The amount shall be remitted within four weeks fromtoday. jan/- ANTONY DOMINICJUDGE