IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 19043 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S. ROMAN TARMAT LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AT GENERAL VAIDYA MARG, GOREGAON EAST, MUMBAI - 400 063, HAVING BRANCH OFFICE AT MANIMADOM, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 561, REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI.R. ANANTHA NARAYANAN. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN, SMT.G.DEEPA. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WC & LT) OFFICE OF THE DY. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KERALA AT VIKAS BHAVAN. P.O, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 19043 of 2011(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21/05/2011 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEARS 2009-2010. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/03/2011 IN WP(C) NO. 7144/2011 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REFUND APPLICATION DATED 17/01/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23/05/2011 FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05/04/2011 FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ADJOURNMENT LETTER DATED 26/04/2011 FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT PROVING OF EXT.P6 LETTER. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEARS 2009-2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.19043 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 revised assessment order for the year 2009-2010 on the ground that the petitioner has not been given sufficient opportunity to put forward their case before the 1st respondent. The petitioner's contention is that on receipt of the notice for revising the assessment, the petitioner submitted an application for adjournment which has not been even replied to. Therefore that amounts to violation of principles of natural justice, is the contention raised. The learned Government Pleader admits that an adjournment application has been filed by the petitioner. He would submit that it is misplaced. At the same time he would contend that insofar as the petitioner has already accepted refund of the excess amount as per Ext.P1 revised assessment order, the petitioner is estopped now from W.P.(C)No.19043 of 2011 -2- challenging Ext.P1 assessment order. 2. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 3. I am not satisfied that the acceptance of the excess amount remitted by the petitioner would estop the petitioner from challenging other findings in Ext.P1 assessment order if according to the petitioner the revised assessment itself is bad. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed an application for adjournment on which orders have not been passed. That fact is not even referred to in Ext.P1 order. In fact in Ext.P1 order what is stated is that an opportunity was granted to the petitioner and the petitioner did not file objections against the proposals in the notice for revising the assessment. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity to put forward his case. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of as follows: Ext.P1 assessment order is quashed. The petitioner has already filed Ext.P4 objections to the notice dated 05.04.2011. The 1st respondent shall give the petitioner an W.P.(C)No.19043 of 2011 -3- opportunity of being heard and pass fresh orders pursuant to the notice dated 05.04.2011, expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/