IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2011 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 4316 of 2005(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------- V.C.MOYI, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. CHERIYA MOHAMMED HAJI, "SAFA MANZIL", KUMARANELLUR AMSO, ANAYAMKUNNU DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS RESPONDENTs: --------------- 1. THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER (ASSESSINGT AUTHORITY), KOZHIKODE. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KOZHIKODE. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI BABY JOHN PUTHENPURAKKAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 4316 of 2005(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COY OF THE LEGAL HEIR SHIP CERTIFICATED DT. 23.9.1989 ISSUED BY TAHSILDAR, KOZHIKODE EXT.P2 : TRUE COY OF ORDER DATED 31.7.1998 OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 13.1.2003 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF ATTACHEMENT DATED 2.5.2003 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT. 10.6.2003 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// jma K.Vinod Chandran, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.4316 of 2005-L ---------------------------------------- Dated this, the 21st day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT The writ petition has been filed by the son of one Vayalil Cheriya Mohammed Haji, who was an assessee under the Agricultural Income Tax Act. The deceased assessee was served with an assessment order under the Act for the assessment years 1979-80 to 1982-83, fixing the taxable income and raising demands for the tax and surcharge due. The assessee had filed appeals before the first appellate authority. Exhibit P2 order of the first appellate authority made modifications in the assessment and directed the assessment orders to be revised in accordance with the observations in the first appellate order. The modified assessment order was passed as per order dated 14.1.1988, which was again challenged by the assessee before the first appellate authority, which was disposed of directing revising of the assessment orders in accordance with the modifications made, as per Exhibit P2 dated 21.07.1988. The petitioner submits that after the death of the assessee, the petitioner was served with a notice for attachment dated 27.11.2002 directing payment of arrears due from the WP(C).No.4316 of 2005-L - 2 - deceased assessee and the petitioner was proceeded against as the legal heir of the deceased assessee as per Exhibit P4 order of attachment and Exhibit P5 notice of sale. The petitioner contends that no orders have been passed after the remand order Exhibit P2 and the assessing officer has not revised the assessment in accordance with the modifications made in the appeal. 2. The learned Government Pleader took time for ascertaining whether revised assessment orders were passed and on the next date of posting it is submitted that there was no information as to the passing of a revised order. 3. The assessment is of the years 1979-80 to 1982-83 and the order granting modifications and directing revision of the assessment order, Exhibit P2, is dated 21.7.1988. Though the Agricultural Income Tax Act does not prescribe any time for effecting the modifications, it cannot be disputed that the modification has to be made within a reasonable time, as has been consistently held by this Court. 4. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that no proceedings can be taken with respect to the assessment of the deceased father of the petitioner herein for the years 1979-80 to 1982-83; in the absence of any modified assessment having been WP(C).No.4316 of 2005-L - 3 - made within a reasonable period after Exhibit P2 was passed. In the circumstances, the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the dues of his father under the Agricultural Income Tax Act cannot be continued. I hereby quash Exhibit P4 and set aside the attachment made by the said order. In the result of the attachment being set aside, no further proceedings can be taken pursuant to Exhibit P5 and I order accordingly. The writ petition is allowed. K.Vinod Chandran, Judge. vku/-