High Court of KeralaWP(C)/13647/2015disposed of

M/S. Thatha Hi-Tech Industries v. The Commercial Tax Officer

2015-05-08Honourable Mr. Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MAY 2015/18TH VAISAKHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 13647 of 2015 (E) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :

------------------------- M/S. THATHA HI-TECH INDUSTRIES, 8/817, NIDA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI.PRADHIP.T.INASU.

BY ADVS.SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.V.K.SHAMUSUDHEEN RESPONDENT(S) :

-----------------------------

1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IIIRD CIRCLE, PALAKKAD-678 001.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001.

3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.FAZIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

WP(C).No. 13647 of 2015 (E) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 11.07.2014. EXT.P2:

TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.08.2014.

EXT.P3:

TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.08.2014.

EXT.P4:

TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.03.2015.

EXT.P5:

TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 08.08.2014.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

******************************************************* W.P.(C) No.13647 of 2015 ******************************************************* Dated this the 8th day of May, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by the condition order passed in an appeal for stay directing the petitioner to pay 30% of the disputed amount. The petitioner submits that this is not a non-speaking order and therefore, is liable to be set aside.

In the light of the above, the impugned order is set aside and there shall be a direction to the second respondent to reconsider the stay application within two months. Till a decision is taken in the stay application, all recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order is stayed. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln