IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30270 of 2003 © -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- HOTEL LUCIA, KANICHAI HOTELS PVT. LTD., EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ACCOUNTS MANAGER, C.SASIKUMAR. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. SALES TAX OFFICER (E), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.K.P.PRADEEP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/09/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 17267 OF 2004 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30270 of 2003 © APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS. EXT.P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.LT.97/2000-01 DATED 14.1.2003 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE OBJECTION (LETTER NO.LUC/M-477/2002-03) DATED 18.1.2003 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3.COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.1.03 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.2.2003. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE ORDER IN STA 1069/2002 DATED 29.8.2003. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL P.S. TO JUDGE / TRUE COPY / VK P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) Nos. 30270 of 2003 & 17267 of 2004 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 28th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the issue with regard to the liability to satisfy the luxury tax, in similar circumstances as involved in these petitions already stands covered against the petitioner. In some of the matters, Writ Appeals have been preferred by the aggrieved parties and the same are pending. The learned counsel further submits that, similar Writ Petitions filed before this Court have already been disposed of with liberty to move the appellate authority and in the said circumstances, the petitioners would like to withdraw the matters, to move the appropriate authority for reddressal of their grievances. 2. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case and the Writ Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioners to pursue the matter in accordance with law. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd