IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HOUNOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 34508 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KARTHIK.K.S., M/S.PALLAVI ENTERPRISES, PATTIKKAD, NEAR HIGH SCHOOL, PATTIKKAD, THRISSUR-680652. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, VAT CIRCLE-1, THRISSUR-3. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-15. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEECHI POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 34508 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Writ petition is filed challenging proceedings initiated pursuant to Ext.P2, which is an application submitted by the 2nd respondent before the 1st respondent invoking proceedings under Section 31 (4) (b) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). According to the petitioner his registration was cancelled on the basis of allegation that the petitioner had produced bogus 'C' Forms and claimed exemption from payment of Central Sales Tax. Against the order cancelling the registration, the petitioner had filed Ext.P1 appeal before the 3rd respondent. From Ext.P2 it is evident that there is arrears of tax due, to the tune of Rs.2,97,103/- for which steps have now been initiated under Section 31 (4) (b). It is the case of the petitioner that no assessment order was served on the petitioner before proceeding with the steps of recovery. W.P.(C)No. 34508 of 2009 -2- The petitioner apprehends that the 1st respondent may proceed with issuance of warrant for arrest against the petitioner. 2. The petitioner could not successfully challenge proceedings initiated under Section 31 (4) (b), unless the petitioner had challenged the assessment in statutory appeal. If the petitioner has not received copy of the assessment order, he can approach the 2nd respondent seeking for issuance of certified copy, and on getting certified copy the petitioner can take steps for filing appeal. Needless to say that appropriate interim relief can also be sought for from the appellate authority. Therefore I am of the view that, without resorting to statutory remedy available, the petitioner could not challenge Ext.P2 and other recovery steps. 3. Having confronted with the above position learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this court to keep in abeyance coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P2 for a reasonable time, in order to facilitate the petitioner to W.P.(C)No. 34508 of 2009 -3- approach the appellate authority. 4. Under the above circumstances the respondents are restrained from proceeding with further coercive steps for a period of six weeks in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach assessing authority to get certified copy of the assessment and to file appeal against such assessment. 5. Having considered the fact that the appeal evidenced from Ext.P1 filed against cancellation of registration is pending consideration and disposal before the 3rd respondent, that authority is directed to dispose of the appeal at the earliest, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/