IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 18TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27079 of 2010(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SUNIL.V.NINAN,VALIAPARAMBIL, CHATHANKARY,THIRUVALLA. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR, SMT.P.LISSY JOSE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE FAST TRACK ASSESSMENT TEAM(WC), COMMERCIAL TAXES,PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WC & LT), COMMERCIAL TAXES,PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R), TALUK OFFICE,THIRUVALLA, PIN-689 101. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 27079 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 9th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Ext.P3 assessment order issued under section 17D of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 is under challenge. it is contended by the petitioner that the 1st respondent has not issued any pre-assessment notice before finalizing the assessment. It is also contended that the notice calling for production of account which is referred to in the assessment order was also not served on the petitioner. According to the petitioner, no enquiry as contemplated under the provision was also conducted before finalizing the assessment. Hence, the assessment order itself is challenged, being the one issued against provisions contained in the Statute and in violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents conceded that no pre-assessment notice W.P.(C) No. 27079/2010 2 was issued before passing Ext.P3 assessment order. Further it is contended that a notice calling for production of account was issued earlier. 3. Having found that Ext.P3 assessment order is not issued after complying with the mandatory procedures contemplated under section 17D as well as the directions issued by this Court in the a decision reported in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. V. Asst. Commissioner (2009 (4) KHC 819), I am inclined to quash Ext.P3 assessment order and to remand the matter for compliance of the procedures. 4. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and Ext.P3 assessment order is quashed. The 1st respondent will be at liberty to issue fresh notice and to proceed with finalization of the assessment after due compliance with of all legal requirements. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.