IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7073 of 2010(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.R.KRISHNAKUMAR, SARANYA LAMINATES INDUSTRIES, MELEVETTIPPURAM, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR SMT.P.LISSY JOSE. RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE FAST TRACK ASSESSMENT TEAM NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(R.R.), PATHANAMTHITTA. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 7073 of 2010-H ---------------------------- Dated this the day of March, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is actually aggrieved of Ext.P4 notice issued under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act issued by the fourth respondent, seeking to realise the amount stated as due from the petitioner under Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders in respect of the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that challenging the above assessment orders, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 and P2(a) appeals along with Ext.P3 and P3(a) petition for condoning the delay in filing the same. But the petitioner has got a case that Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders could not have any valid existence in view of the declaration of the law by this Court as per the decision reported in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam & others 2009(4) KHC 819 particularly for the reason that the above assessment orders have W.P(C) No. 7073 of 2010-H 2 been passed under Section 17D of the KGST Act, which however, is not in conformity with the statutory requirements. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Going by the materials on record, it is seen that Ext.P1 and P1(a) orders, though stated as passed by the Fast Track Team under Section 17D, do not bear the name and signature of all the four members of the team, which is a basic requirement to make the proceedings valid and sustainable. The law having been declared in the decision rendered in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam & others (supra), this Court find that the said orders are not sustainable in law. 5. In the above circumstances, Ext.P1and P1(a) orders are set aside and the second respondent/competent authority is directed to re-consider the matter with specific reference to the statutory requirements as explained by this Court vide the decision reported in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam & others (supra) and pass final orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two W.P(C) No. 7073 of 2010-H 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that since Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders have been set aside by this Court, Ext.P4 demand notice issued under the Revenue Recovery Act is of no consequence. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab W.P(C) No. 7073 of 2010-H 4