Kerala High Court
M/S Paragon Steels Pvt. Ltd vs Intelligence Officer on 23 November, 2009
Author: C.K.Abdul Rehim
Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 33598 of 2009(T)
1. M/S PARAGON STEELS PVT. LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.I,
... Respondent
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),
3. KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE
4. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :23/11/2009
O R D E R
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.33598 OF 2009
------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2009
J U D G M E N T
----------------------
1. Since it is stated that the second appeal filed against Ext.P1 order of assessment, which stands confirmed in Ext.P2 appellate order, along with delay condonation application and stay petition, is pending consideration and disposal before the 3rd respondent Tribunal, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary directions to that Tribunal.
2. It is stated that Ext.P4 petition filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal is already posted for consideration before the Tribunal, on tomorrow (24.11.2009). Therefore the 3rd respondent Tribunal is directed to consider and pass orders on the delay condonation application at the earliest, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
3. If delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted, then the Tribunal shall consider Ext.P5 stay petition and pass orders thereon immediately, at any rate before the time stipulated W.P.(C).33598/09-T 2 above. The respondents are directed to keep in abeyance recovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P9 notice for realisation of the amounts covered under Ext.P1 order which now stands modified as per Ext.P6, till orders are passed by the 3rd respondent Tribunal as directed above.
4. It is submitted that the petitioner had already remitted 44% of the penalty amount in dispute as per direction issued by this court during pendency of the first appeal. The 3rd respondent Tribunal shall also take note of the above fact while issuing orders on the stay application.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
okb