IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30105 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.J&J TIMBERS, 23/418, MAIN ROAD, CHALAKUDY-REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SHRI.C.D.JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER KUNDARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ASSESSMENT) SPECIAL CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV.SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 30105 OF 2008 H ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 14th day of October, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P1. Ext.P1 is a notice issued under section 19C of the KGST Act read with section 17(3) of the Act. Petitioner has already submitted Ext.P2 reply. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.T.M.Sreedharan and the learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that there is no basis for invoking section 19C of the Act and it is without jurisdiction. He also contends that section 19C of the Act cannot be invoked beyond five years. 3. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am not satisfied that the question raised by the petitioner need be considered under Article 226 of the Constitution at this stage. I feel that the authority which has issued Ext.P1 notice is duty bound to consider each and every contentions raised by the petitioner. When a notice is issued WPC.30105/08 : 2 : and the party raises objections including objections relating to jurisdiction, that it is barred by time, the statutory authority should apply its mind and will not take a decision on the basis that the notice is already issued. In other words, the statutory authority must have an open mind and must be prepared to correct itself if he has erred in the first place in issuing the notice and the mistake is pointed out to it. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: The 1st respondent will apply its mind to every contentions raised before it and take a decision in the matter in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. I feel that this will suffice in the interest of justice. The 1st respondent is duty bound to support whatever conclusions he may arrive at with proper reasons. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE