IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 8TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 17TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24034 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- U.P.ANILKUMAR, PROPRIETOR, PRABHA RUBBER STORES, AIRAKUZHY.P.O., CHITHARA, KOLLAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR SRI.KURYAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DIST. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 4. A.J.THOMAS, PROPRIETOR, M/S. AMBATTU RUBBER STORES, POTTY BUILDING, THEVANCODE, KALLIKKAD, MYLAKKARA.P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.24034 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the 3rd respondent to issue required number of Form 25 Declarations to the 4th respondent, for issuing such declarations to the petitioner with respect to purchases of Rubber effected from the petitioner, which will reflect in the accounts of the 4th respondent. The petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier occasion which resulted in Ext.P8 Judgment. According to the petitioner Form 25 declarations were denied to the 4th respondent for the reason that the 4th respondent is in arrears of payment of Sales Tax. But the petitioner placed reliance on Ext.P7 Judgment of this Court with respect to another assessee, wherein this Court directed issuance of Form 25 Declarations even in a case where registration is cancelled, with respect to transactions pertaining to the period prior to cancellation. In Ext.P8 Judgment this Court directed the 3rd respondent to verify the assessment records of the 4th respondent for the year 2003-04 and to issue Form 25 declarations, if found eligible, in W.P.(C).24034/09-Y 2 order to cover purchases effected from the petitioner, which are accounted by the 4th respondent, within a period of one month. But in Ext.P9 notice the 4th respondent was intimated that the 3rd respondent is not in a position to issue Form 25 Declarations since the connected records for the year 2003-04 could not be verified because they are in the custody of the Detective Inspector of CBCID, Narcotic and Economic Offence Cell, Thiruvananthapuram in connection with an investigation. Going by Ext.P9 notice it is revealed that the said notice is issued without taking into consideration of the directions contained in Ext.P8 Judgment. In the meanwhile steps are being persuaded by the assessing authority concerned to finalise assessment of the petitioner for the years 2003-04 and 2004-05 and Ext.P11 notice is issued calling for production of Books of accounts. 2. According to the petitioner eventhough the Books of Accounts of the 4th respondent pertaining to the year 2003-04 is in the custody of the CBCID Inspector, the Purchase Register for the relevant period is available which is a document verified and countersigned by the then assessing authority. Copy of the Purchase Register is produced as Ext.P10. Claim of the petitioner is that the genuineness of transaction between the petitioner and the 4th respondent during the relevant period is discernible from Ext.P10 and Form 25 Declarations can be W.P.(C).24034/09-Y 3 issued based on those transactions revealed from Ext.P10 Purchase Register. 3. However, I notice that Ext.P9 notice was issued without taking into consideration of the directions contained in Ext.P8 Judgment. Further I notice that the 3rd respondent could not deny Form 25 Declarations merely because the assessment records are in the custody of some other agency, if the authority is convinced through other records about genuineness of the transactions. As stated in Ext.P8 Judgment the fact that the 4th respondent is in arrears of sales tax, is also not a tenable reason to deny Form 25 Declarations. Since Purchase Register is available and since it is a document countersigned by the Assessing Authority the question regarding eligibility of Form 25 Declarations can be decided based on the Purchase Register and on verifying the genuineness of the transactions. Further if necessary the authority can arrange verification, or taking of photocopies of the documents in the custody of the CBCID. At any rate the benefits which would have been available to the petitioner could not be denied, for no reason of themself, merely because some of the records pertaining to Respondent No.4 is not available. 4. Under the above mentioned circumstances the writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P9. The 3rd respondent is W.P.(C).24034/09-Y 4 directed to reconsider the matter and to issue Form 25 Declarations to the 4th respondent, with respect to purchases effected from the petitioner, if he is convinced of the genuineness of such transactions after verification of Purchase Register of the 4th respondent for the year 2003-04, Books of accounts of the petitioner, and if necessary any further records available in the custody of the CBCID authorities. A final decision in this regard shall be taken as early as possible, at any rate within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgement C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb