Kerala High Court
Murali T.V vs The Asst. Commissioner (Appeals) on 14 February, 2012
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/25TH MAGHA 1933
WP(C).No. 3641 of 2012 (E)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
------------------------
MURALI T.V., PROPRIETOR OF
CLASSIC CONSTRUCTIONS, PALIYAM ROAD,
THRISSUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.K.DILEEP KUMAR.
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
POOTHOLE POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 004.
2. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
POST POOTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 004.
BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 14-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 3641 of 2012 (E)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DT.23.11.11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C)NO.32146 OF 2011
DT.2.12.11 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF SALES TAX APPEAL NO.495/2011
DT.30.1.2012 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
rs.
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.3641 OF 2012(E)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of February, 2012
J U D G M E N T
Against the assessment under the CST Act pertaining to the year 2008-2009 petitioner filed Ext.P1 appeal which was rejected by Ext.P3 order of the first respondent. In this writ petition what is stated by the petitioner is that he intends to file an appeal against Ext.P3 and therefore the respondent should be directed to keep the revenue recovery proceedings in abeyance. As at present there is an order of assessment against the petitioner which has been confirmed by the appellate authority. Therefore, at this stage the amount is due from the petitioner and if recovery is initiated remedy of the petitioner is to file further appeal against Ext.P3. Without prejudice to that right of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. /09 :2 :