IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 4802 of 2011(A) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): -------------------- M/S.SREE RAMACHANDRAN ENTERPRISES, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY J.SARAVANACHANDRAN, PARTNER. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT, CIRCLE-III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 01 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 01 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 4802 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT With respect to the Assessment years 2007-08 and 2008- 09, penalty was imposed against the petitioner as per Ext.P1 order, under section 67(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act) . Aggrieved by Ext.P1 the petitioner had preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent appellate authority. It is stated that the appeal was heard by the said authority on 14.10.2010 and it was reserved for pronouncing orders. Meanwhile, the 1st respondent had initiated steps for completing assessments against the petitioner with respect to the above said years, on the basis of proposal notices issued under Exts.P3 and P4. Contention of the petitioner is that the assessments were proposed solely based on the order imposing penalty, which is now pending in appeal. Therefore, if the assessments are finalised before disposal of the appeal filed against the order imposing penalty, that will cause severe prejudice, is the contention. Hence the petitioner seeks interference of this court for directing the 2nd respondent to WP(C) .4802/2011 2 dispose of the appeal on an early basis and till then to restrain the 1st respondent from finalising the assessment. 2. Heard; learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering the facts and circumstances I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal on an early basis and also directing the 1st respondent to keep in abeyance passing of final orders of assessment till the disposal of the appeal. 3. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal on the basis of the hearing conducted on 14.10.2010, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. The 1st respondent is directed to keep in abeyance passing of final orders on the basis of Exts.P3 and P4 notices till the disposal of Ext.P2 appeal by the 2nd respondent. However it is made clear that the petitioner will be at liberty to file objections against Exts.P3 and P4 notices, pending disposal of Ext.P2 appeal, and the 1st respondent can proceed with verification of accounts and other documents. Needless to say WP(C) .4802/2011 3 that the assessment shall be finalised only after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file objections and to produce books of accounts and other documents in support of such objections. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) .4802/2011 4