IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 12960 of 2008(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ M/S.OPAL COMBINATION, THANA, KANNUR - 670 012, REPRESENTED BY SHRI.P.ABDUL WAHID, MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANNUR. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 12960 of 2008(P) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX ------------------ PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 2.3.1998. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.6.2003. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE FINAL REVISION ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.5.2007. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 20.1.98 EXT.P5. COPY OF THE S.I.R. DATED 16.10.1997 EXT.P6. COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 16.10.97. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No. 12960 OF 2008 ......................................................................... Dated this the 29th November , 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of Exts.P1 to P3 orders finalised under the relevant provisions of the KGST Act . The petitioner is a registered dealer in the hardwares. There was a surprise inspection of the premises on 16.01.1997 by the first respondent, whereby certain incriminating materials were found out as clearly given in Ext. P5 shop inspection report and Ext. P6 mahazar prepared on the same date. Based on the materials collected as above, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner, which was replied as per the objection dated 28.01.1998. After considering the version of the petitioner, the first respondent passed Ext.P1 order dated 02.03.1998 imposing penalty; aggrieved of which, the petitioner preferred a Revision Petition under Section 45A (3) of the KGST Act before the second respondent. Since interference was declined as per W.P.(C)No. 12960 OF 2008 2 Ext. P2, a further revision was preferred before the third respondent under sub section (5) Section 45A of the KGST Act. This also did not turn to be fruitful as evident from Ext.P3 order, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the contents of Ext.P6 mahazar are not correct or proper and that the quantum of penalty imposed by the first respondent and upheld by the revisional authorities is much on the higher side. 4. On going through the materials on record and after hearing both the sides, this Court finds that no infringement of any legal prescription is brought to the notice of this Court and that the fact adjudication has been made by the authorities at three different levels culminating in Ext.P3 which is found correct. In the said circumstance, this Court does not find any reason to call for interference, exercising the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, W.P.(C)No. 12960 OF 2008 3 interference is declined and the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that this will not stand in the way of the petitioner from availing the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme, if so advised, which is stated as still in existence and valid till 31.12.2010. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk