Abhijith Mohan vs The Asst. Commissioner
2022 Latest Caselaw 9739 Ker

W.A.1289 of 2022

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
                                    &
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

     FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944

                           WA NO. 1289 OF 2022

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23232/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF
                                  KERALA

APPELLANT:
             ABHIJITH MOHAN,AGED 33 YEARS,PROPRIETOR,
             M/S. GLOBAL FOODS,MANGAD P,O, KOLLAM
             KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691015

             BY ADVS.
             HARISANKAR V. MENON
             MEERA V.MENON
             R.SREEJITH
             K.KRISHNA


RESPONDENTS:
     1    THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
          STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT,
          SECOND CIRCLE,
          KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
     2    THE SECRETARY
          KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL
          BENCH,
          SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010


OTHER PRESENT:

             Sr G.P. V.K. Shamsudheen


      THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A.No.1289 of 2022                         -2-



                                       JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of August 2022

S.V.BHATTI, J.

The writ petitioner is the appellant. The operative portion

of the judgment impugned in the appeal reads as follows:

"Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent Tribunal to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, demands in respect of Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance on condition that the petitioner remits a sum equivalent to 10% of the amount due under Ext.P1."

2. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the

parties, we are of the view that there is hardly a ground to

interfere with the order under appeal. However, after

appreciating the special circumstances narrated by

Mr.Harisankar, we are satisfied that eight weeks' time is

granted to the petitioner/dealer to deposit 10% of the tax

amount together with interest demanded by the

department. The appeal filed by the dealer is disposed of

expeditiously preferably within four months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, there

shall be a stay of recovery proceedings pending in appeal

before the Appellate Authority subject to the writ petitioner

complying with the condition now imposed by this judgment.

Sd/- S.V.BHATTI, JUDGE

Sd/- BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE

css/