TOMY EAPEN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner calls in question the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal under Kerala Value Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). By the impugned order, the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant impugning the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Commercial Tax, Kollam confirming the order of the Intelligence Officer whereby the Intelligence Officer collected compounding fee of two lakhs separately from the appellant. The Intelligence Officers attached to squad Nos. 2 and 5 had collected compounding fee of Rs. 2 Lakhs each from the petitioner in lieu of the prosecution. The petitioner is a dealer in gold. He is having two business premises at Pala. He started his business in September, 2007 with Head Office and Branch. Both the Head Office and Branch are located in Pala. On 24/01/2008 the Intelligence Wing had conducted surprise inspection at the above business place. According to the petitioner it is under threat and persuasion and mostly due to ignorance, the revision petitioner was forced to compound the offence separately for the Head Office and Branch resulting in the petitioner paying Rupees two lakhs each for Head Office and Branch.

(2.) According to petitioner, under the Act, only maximum amount of Rs. 2 Lakhs could have been collected from the petitioner in respect of both the Head Office and the Branch. He would also submit that the practice which has been followed hitherto in the state is that only a maximum of Rs. 2 Lakhs is collected even when offences are detected in Head Office and a branch. He would submit that the petitioner is being discriminated against.

(3.) Per contra, learned Government Pleader would submit that order of the Tribunal does not call for any interference. He would submit that for compounding in respect of each offences a maximum compounding fee of Rs. 2 Lakhs has been provided and Intelligence Officer has only applied the law correctly.