IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2009 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30859 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.VINOD, CHANDNI ENTERPRISES, SAKTHI COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD, KODUVAYUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, CHITTUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.30859 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Grievance of the petitioner is that, the assessments with respect to the years 2002-03 to 2004-05 were completed without giving credit to payments of Entry Tax made at the border Check Post, while importing live chicken from the State of Tamilnadu. The credit was not given at the time of finalising the assessments because of the fact that proper proof for payment obtained from the border Check Post was not produced. Subsequently the petitioner obtained Ext.P4 to P9 certificates from the Check Posts at Walayar and Naduppuni, and those certificates were produced before the 1st respondent along with a covering letter as evidenced by Ext.P10. In Ext.P10 the petitioner requested the 1st respondent Assessing Authority to give credit to the payments covered under those certificates and to modify/rectify the assessments accordingly. Complaint of the petitioner is that inspite of submission of Ext.P4 to P9 certificates along with Ext.P10 covering letter as early as in July 2008, the 1st respondent is not taking any action to dispose of the same and to give credit to the payments made. W.P.(C).30859/09-B 2 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner and Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Learned Government Pleader submitted that Ext.P10 is not a proper application filed under Section 43 of the KGST Act and therefore the 1st respondent may not be in a position to give credit on the basis of Ext.P10. Learned counsel for the petitioner expressed his willingness to submit application in the format prescribed within a short period. 3. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit application before the 1st respondent for allowing credit of Entry Tax paid at the border Check Post, in the form prescribed for applications under Section 43 of the KGST Act, along with supporting evidences. If any such application is received by the 1st respondent, the same shall be considered and disposed of as early as possible, at any rate within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such application. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb