IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21582 of 2010(W) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M.ABOO, PWD CONTRACTOR, MANIYARKUNNATH HOUSE, NHANGATTIRI PO, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD,-679 311. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHAKARA MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT , GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. FAST TRACK TEAM-II, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TAXES COMPLEX, PALAKKAD,PIN.678 001. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAXE OFFICER, (WORKS CONTRACT), COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, PALAKKAD-678 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 21582 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the assessment finalized by the 2nd respondent Fast Track Team under Section 17 D without any regard to the statutory requirements or the law declared by this Court on the point. The learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to many a ground of challenge raised in the Writ Petition, also submits that, Ext.P1 assessment order impugned in the Writ Petition has not been signed by all the members of the Fast Track team and as such, there is no joint application of mind as stipulated and contemplated. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Going by the materials on record, this Court finds considerable force in the submission made from the part of the petitioner. The course and procedure to be pursued while finalizing assessment under Section 17D of the KGST Act have been made clear by this Court as per the decision reported in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam and others [2009 (4) KHC 819]. This being the position, this Court finds it difficult to sustain Ext.P1, as the same does not stand the test of law. 4. In the said circumstances, Ext.P1 is set aside and the 2nd 2 WP(C) No. 21582/2010 respondent/such other authority as the case may be, is directed to reconsider the matter and finalise the assessment in accordance with the relevant provisions of law and the observations made by this Court in the decision cited supra, which shall be finalized after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc