IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34919 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ K.M.ALIKOYA, PROPRIETOR, SAJEENA STORES, NEW BAZAR, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY P.A.HOLDER SRI.K.A.ANSHAD, SABEELA MANZIL, CIVIL STATION ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV.S SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, FIRST CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 2. DY.COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM-691 009. 3. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.34919 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The best judgment assessment completed against the petitioner under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act), with respect to the year 2009-10 is, under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner inter alia contend that, before completing the assessment, he was not given an opportunity of personal hearing, after submission of objections to the pre-assessment notice. 2. The petitioner relies on a decision of this court in Suzion Infrastructure Service Ltd. Vs. C.T.O. (2010 (3) KHC 299) for contending that affording of an opportunity of hearing before finalisation of assessment, is mandatory and failure to comply with such requirement will vitiate the order of assessment. However, it is noticed that the petitioner had preferred statutory appeal against Ext.P3 order before the 2nd respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P4. Considering pendency of the appeal, I am of the view that the matter can be disposed of directing the appellate authority to have an W.P.(C).34919/10-L -2- expeditious disposal of the appeal. The petitioner points out that through Ext.P5 notice coercive steps of recovery has now been initiated resorting to provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. 3. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is hereby disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. Till such time orders are issued by the 2nd respondent as directed above, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P3 which is now initiated pursuant to Ext.P5 notice, shall be kept in abeyance, subject to condition of the petitioner furnishing Security Bond for the total amount due within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb