ORDER D. V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR J. - The writ petition by an assessee under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the Act") who it appears was in arrears of payment of tax and is particularly aggrieved that a demand notice for realization of a sum of Rs. 80,49,741 as per notice dated November 10, 2008 (copy at annexure E) is one not based on any factual or legal premise but in fact one overlooking the payment of taxes made by the petitioner to the extent of Rs. 64,27,821; that notwithstanding the petitioner having paid this amount of arrears of sales tax which had been demanded for payment by the petitioner and the petitioner though had paid, a fresh demand for higher amount is made in terms of the impugned notice and therefore the demand notice at annexure E should be quashed by issue of a writ of certiorari. The petitioner's only grievance being that an amount of Rs. 64,27,821 though had been remitted to the Department by way of demand draft, had not been given credit to, but a demand for higher amount having been raised on the petitioner, the petitioner had been directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000 by way of costs which could be awarded to the respondent if the petitioner's averments lacked bona fides, etc., and for verification of this aspect, notice had been issued to the respondent and Sri Shivayogiswamy, learned Government Pleader was directed to take notice for the respondent. Sri Shivayogiswamy, learned Government Pleader, has filed statement of objections, in which it is indicated that there is no duplicate payment raised on the petitioner; that while a sum of Rs. 64,27,821 constitutes arrears of sales tax dues for the period from the years 1997-98 to 2000-01 and which the petitioner has subsequently paid and has been given credit to, the present demand as per annexure E is only the interest part payable under section 13(2) of the Act in respect of the tax which was in arrears and in support of this version as averred in the statement of objections, the respondent has placed before the court a communication dated April 25, 2007 addressed to the petitioner indicating a sum of Rs. 80,49,741 constituting the interest payable under section 13(2) of the Act for the outstanding arrears up to March 31, 2007 and the details of the same is also annexed to this communication, copy of which is produced as annexure R2 to the statement of objections. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the amount of Rs. 80,49,741 even in terms of annexure E is not the amount demanded for the first time but had been demanded even as early as per communication dated April 25, 2007 (copy at annexure R2 to the statement of objections) and as the petitioner had not paid the said interest amount, a further recovery notice had been issued (copy of which is produced as annexure E to the writ petition) for realization of this interest amount; that the amount paid by the petitioner had been duly given credit to the account of the petitioner in respect of the outstanding arrears of tax; that it is not as though the demand for Rs. 80,49,741 is either any duplication or any amount towards this sum has already been paid by the petitioner, etc. The details of the interest amount calculated for the years 1996-97 up to 2000-01 as per the calculation sheet attached to annexure R2 do indicate that the amount adds up to around Rs. 80 lakhs which is more or less the same amount as at annexure E, etc. It is not as though the petitioner was not aware of the demand raised for payment of this amount earlier, but on the other hand has pleaded ignorance of it and has further pleaded that in fact is taken by surprise as per the demand notice issued in form No. 41 dated November 10, 2008 as at annexure E. The petitioner though was very much aware of the demand being towards part of the interest payable on the outstanding arrears, has nevertheless approached this court contending that the petitioner though had paid a sum of Rs. 64,27,821 is nevertheless being asked to pay an higher amount of Rs. 80,49,741 without giving credit to the account of the petitioner the amount already paid by the petitioner and it is in this context had sought for issuing a declaration that the notice under annexure E was illegal and unenforceable, etc. 64,27,821 is nevertheless being asked to pay an higher amount of Rs. 80,49,741 without giving credit to the account of the petitioner the amount already paid by the petitioner and it is in this context had sought for issuing a declaration that the notice under annexure E was illegal and unenforceable, etc. The petitioner's contention being without any merit and even the averments made in the writ petition being virtually suppressio veri, the writ petition is not a bona fide availment of the writ remedy before this court. There is absolutely no justification to characterize the demand at annexure E to be either illegal or not enforceable. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed and the amount of Rs. 50,000 being the cost deposited by the petitioner is awarded in favour of the Revenue. It is open to the respondent to seek withdrawal of this amount by filing an application in the registry.