IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2008 / 30TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 25244 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- K.R. REEZ, EX PROPRIETOR, FRIENDS TRANSPORT COMPANY, 11/110, AMBALAMUGAL, NEAR HOCL, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PUNALUR. 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No.25244 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P10. He seeks a direction to the first respondent to recompute the eligibility of the petitioner for Amnesty Scheme by setting up the payments made towards the tax dues as per Exts.P1 to P4 orders. 2. Briefly put the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner came to be assessed to tax and penalty as per Exts.P1 to P4 orders passed in November, 2000. Towards the same, the petitioner remitted Rs.2.5 Lakhs towards the dues in October, 2001 and another sum of Rs.3.5 Lakhs in February, 2008. In all the petitioner has paid Rs.Six Lakhs. An Amnesty Scheme was announced. Petitioner decided to avail the same and an application was made, which culminated in Ext.P10 order and the petitioner has been called upon to pay Rs.1,60,155/- as the first instalment. In all the petitioner has been called upon to pay Rs.6,40,619/-. 3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. WPC.25244/2008. 2 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the amount calculated as payable under the Amnesty Scheme is clearly illegal and erroneous for the reason that they have not given due credit to the sum of Rs. Six Lakhs paid by the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1 to P4 orders. 5. Learned Government Pleader supports the order. 6. I do not think that there is any merit in the contention of the petitioner. The circular is dated 28.3.2008. It contemplates relief, which varies according to the year to which it relates. Admittedly petitioner has made payments in all a sum of Rs. Six Lakhs pursuant to Exts.P1 to P4 orders prior to 1.4.2008. In my view, the Amnesty Scheme contemplates writing off various sums as contemplated in the same apparently with the intention of raising revenue as far as possible and at the same time granting some relief to the assessee depending on the year to which the assessment relates. In my view therefore the scheme does not contemplate that the payments which have already been made and which have been adjusted as per the law should be re-opened. What the Scheme contemplates is that whatever be the arrears as on 1.4.2008 with subsequent interest, which may fall due, the same has to be considered when an application is made for the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that whatever has been paid is now adjusted towards the interest. WPC.25244/2008. 3 No exception could be taken if the amount was adjusted towards interest as the law provided. If that be so, I would think that there is no illegality committed by the authority in issuing Ext.P10. No case is made out for re- computation. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb