IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18591 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.J.THOMAS & CO., KOTTAPPURAM, KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MG.PARTNER, M.J.THOMAS. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), O/O.THE INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER(INT.), COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR-680004. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)I COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR-680003 3. M/S.S.R.RAVIKUMAR & CO., MUNDY MERCHANTS AND COMMISSION AGENTS, NO.149, GAREBHAVI ROAD, BENGARAPET- 563114. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 18591 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the apprehension that the specific reply submitted in response to Ext.P3 notice issued under Section 45 (A) of the KGST Act is likely to be given a go-bye and the proceedings are about to be finalised even without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits with reference to the admitted facts and figures, that the apprehension expressed by the petitioner is quite wrong and misconceived. As per Ext.P3 notice dated 25.05.2010, the petitioner has been required to furnish objections within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice. It is also stated that the petitioner has submitted Ext.P11 reply dated 09.06.2010 and this being the position, the objections raised from the part of the petitioner will definitely be considered before the proceedings are finalised by the concerned authority. It is also pointed out that the petitioner is at liberty to file necessary proceedings before the concerned authority if the petitioner wants to cross-examine any of the witnesses concerned. 2 WP(C) No. 18591/2010 3. In the above circumstances, this Court finds that no further orders are necessary in this case, but for observing that Ext.P3 shall be considered and finalised by the first respondent after taking note of the objections vide Ext.P11 and after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses, if any, sought for, giving an opportunity of hearing as well. The proceedings as above shall be finalised as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the petitioner shall co-operate with the proceedings without fail. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc