IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 31984 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- KAREEM.K, PROPRIETOR, MS.KTK INTERIORS : KALPETTA, REP. BY K.AFASAR, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER S/O.AKBAR.K.K., AMMU APPARTMENTS, PINAGODE ROAD, KALPETTA ROAD, KALPETTA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), VYTHIRI. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KALPETTA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL RAHIM J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No.31984 of 2009-P ------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009. J U D G M E N T 1. Petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by revenue recovery steps initiated pursuant to Exts.P1 & P2 notices, for realization of sales tax arrears. According to the petitioner, the notices are issued in the address of his proprietory concern, M/s.KTK Interiors, Kalpetta. But the said firm is not in arrears of any amount of sales tax. The petitioner apprehends that probably the revenue recovery steps might have been initiated for realization of arrears with respect to a partnership concern M/s.Alliance Trading Company, in which the petitioner was a partner, along with four others. Contention is that no notice prior to the recovery steps or copy of any assessment, was issued to him. Therefore the recovery steps are to be quashed. 2. In the statement filed on behalf of the second respondent, it is revealed that the assessment is made against the firm M/s.Alliance Trading Company, with respect to the year 2005-06, in which the petitioner was a partner. It is further stated that the order of assessment was duly served on the assessee by sending it through registered post acknowledgment due, which is returned as the shop remains closed. Subsequently, it was served through affixure. Therefore it is contended that before initiating revenue recovery steps there was proper service of W.P(C) No.31984 of 2009-P 2 the order of assessment. 3. Having confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to approach the appellate authority in appeal against the assessment, provided a certified copy of the assessment order is served on him. Learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner can approach the assessing authority with a proper application for getting certified copy. 4. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed relegating the petitioner to remedy available by way of appeal. 5. If the petitioner submits any application for certified copy of the assessment order, the second respondent shall issue the same in order to facilitate filing of appeal, within a week from the date of receipt of such application. The petitioner can approach the appellate authority in appeal against the assessment. Needless to say that the petitioner can also seek appropriate interim relief from the appellate authority. 6. However, in order to facilitate the petitioner to move in appeal, coercive steps of recovery now initiated pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notices are directed to kept in abeyance for a period of one month from today. C.K.ABDUL RAHIM JUDGE ab