K. M. Joseph, J. The petitioner in the writ petition is the appellant. The writ petition was filed feeling aggrieved by Ext.P8 order. The
Authority. The petitioner also moved an application for interim stay. The said application stands disposed of by granting stay subject to the condition that the petitioner would deposit sum of Rs.12 Lakhs and to furnish adequate security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the assessing authority. The learned Single Judge affirmed Ext.P8 order. Hence this appeal.
2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that, with regard to the taxable turnover computed by the Assessing Officer, the appellant raised serious contentions. According to the appellant, the Assessing Authority ought to have allowed the claim of exemption amounting to Rs.2,62,48,506/-. We notice in the appeal memorandum that the appellant has a contention that out of Rs.2,62,48,506/-, Rs.86,69,061/- represents pure labour receipts and Rs.1,75,48,445/- represents sales to Special Economic Zone, which is liable to tax @ 0%. The complaint of the appellant is that in passing the order of stay, there is no prima facie consideration of the matter.
4. We feel that the matter must be re-done by the Assessing Authority. Accordingly, setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we quash Ext.P8. While reconsidering the matter, the Assessing Authority shall also consider the contentions raised by the appellant. The appellant will appear before the Assessing Authority along with a copy of the judgment on 25/6/2014. The order will be passed within a period of one week thereafter. Till order is passed by the Assessing Authority, recovery proceedings against the appellant will be kept in abeyance.
The writ appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE dpk.
/True copy/ P.S to Judge.