SPML INFRA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EXT.P4 interim order issued by the 3rd respondent appellate authority is under challenge in this writ petition. Assessment was finalised against petitioner with respect to the year 2007-2008 as per EXT.P1 order. Petitioner had challenged the assessment before the 3rd respondent in EXT.P2 appeal which was filed accompanied by a stay petition. Through EXT.P4 the stay petition was disposed of granting interim stay subject to condition of the petitioner remitting 1/3rd of the total amount and on furnishing security bond for the balance.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner the condition was imposed in a mechanical manner without considering the factual aspects and without adverting to the contentions raised in its proper perspective.

(3.) ON a perusal of Ext.P4, it is evident that the appellate authority had illustrated all the contentions raised by the petitioner. The allegation regarding total lack of non consideration could not be accepted going by the contents of the impugned order. However, it is noticed that the aspect of non finalisation of assessment for the subsequent year, was not considered by the appellate authority. So also, no specific reason has stated with respect to discarding of the contentions raised to the extent that the turn over had already suffered tax.