IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 WA.No.2408 of 2002(A) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.31199/1999 Dated 21/06/2002 .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER:- ------------------------------------ M/S. SUPERSTAR DISTILLERIES & FOODS LIMITED, "SRIVIKAS", 7/223, CHANDRANAGAR P.O. PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMPANY SECRETARY SRI.P.KANDASWAMY. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS:- ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 3. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER-I, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 4. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, IV CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM. 5. KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING) CORPORATION LIMITED, SASTHA GROUP OFFICE COMPLEX, SASTHAMANGALAM, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, TALAPPALLI, WADAKKANCHERY, PALAKKAD. R1 TO R4 & R6 BY SPL.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.2408 of 2002 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 17th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. An order passed under Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 ('KGST Act' for short) was the subject matter of the writ petition. The learned Single Judge though noticed that the petitioner has a right of revision against the impugned order, still proceeds to decide the case on merits. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is before us in this writ appeal. 2. It is not in dispute nor it can be disputed that what was questioned by the petitioner/assessee is an order passed by the assessing authority in exercise of his powers under Section 45A of the KGST Act. If for any reason, the assessee was aggrieved by the said order he ought to have questioned the same before appropriate revisional authority, but without doing so had rushed to this Court by filing the original petition. 3. In our opinion, the remedy of revision is not only effective but also an efficacious remedy. Bypassing that remedy the petitioner should not have approached this Court. In that view of the matter, without going into the other details of the case this writ appeal is disposed of granting liberty to the appellant/assessee, if he so desires, to question the correctness or otherwise of the order passed by the assessing authority under Section 45A of the KGST Act before the revisional authority within 45 days from today. If such a revision is filed within the time granted by this Court, the revisional authority shall consider the case without reference to the period of limitation and also without W.A.No.2408 of 2002 2 being influenced by any of the observations made by the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition. 4. With these observations the writ appeal is disposed of. 5. Consequently C.M.P.No.6330 of 2002 stands dismissed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN) JUDGE vns W.A.No.2408 of 2002 3