IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2010 / 28TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1220 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.N.SUDHAKARAN, PROPRIETOR, MALIYIL RUBBER INDUSTRIES, PARAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, FIRST CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. FAST TRACK ADALATH TEAM NO.III, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 1220 & 1648 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The issue involved in both these cases, though not connected with each other, appears to be rather similar and hence are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The petitioners in both these cases are aggrieved of the assessment made under Section 17 D of the KGST Act. The main challenge raised against the proceedings is that, the pre assessment notice as well as final assessment order issued under Section 17 D are not in conformity with the mandatory requirements contemplated under relevant provisions of law as explained by the Division Bench of this Court in Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam and others [2009 (4) KHC 819]. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent fairly submits that, the legal position projected from the part of the petitioners with regard to the finalization of the proceedings is correct and that the matter is liable to be reconsidered by the Fast Track Team, in the light of the observations made by the Division Bench of this WP(C) No.1220 & 1648/2010 2 Court in the decision cited supra. 4. In the facts and circumstances, Exts.P4 and P5 in WP(C) 1220/2010 and Ext.P2 in WP(C) 1648/2010 are hereby set aside. The concerned respondents are directed to consider the matter afresh and finalise the proceedings, in accordance with law, in the light of the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in 2009 (4) KHC 819, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which exercise shall be finalized, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such orders are passed, all further coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance. Both the Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc