RMP INFOTECH (P) LTD. Vs. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri. Bobby John, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. N.K. Shamsudheen, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) BY Ext. P7 order passed on 30.3.3009, under Section 67(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, the first respondent imposed on the petitioner a penalty of Rs. 18,13,050/ -. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner has filed Ext.P10 appeal before the third respondent Appellate Tribunal along with Ext. P11 stay petition and Ext. P12 application seeking expeditious disposal of the appeal. In this writ petition the petitioner inter alia prays for expeditious orders on Ext. P10 appeal. In the alternative the petitioner prays for expeditious hearing and disposal of Ext.P11 stay petition. Ext. P7 order was passed on 30.3.2009. The petitioner has within one month from that date filed Ext. P10 appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The appeal is therefore one filed within the period of limitation. Since the petitioner has invoked a statutory remedy available to them, I am of the opinion of the Appellate Tribunal should consider the appeal and pass orders thereon expeditiously, after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Along with the appeal the petitioner has filed Ext. 11 application praying for stay of recovery of the penalty imposed as per Ext. P7. In my opinion, the petitioner cannot be granted an unconditional order of stay, pending disposal of the appeal. In my opinion an interim order staying the recovery of the penalty imposed as per Ext. P7 can be granted if the petitioner deposits with the first respondent 1/3rd of the penalty imposed as per Ext. P7 and also furnishes security for the balance amount of penalty to the satisfaction of the first respondent. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: