IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15016 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KODAK INDIA LTD., C.P. UMMER ROAD, ERNAKULAM KOCHI - 682035, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY SRI.MAHESHDAS A. BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONR, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE -II, ERNAKULAM. 2. FAST TRACK TEAM, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY THE DY.COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONR, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 15016 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext.P2 assessment finalised by the 2nd respondent Fast Track Team under Section 17 D of the KGST Act. 2. Many a ground has been raised by the petitioner in support of the challenge, including the fact that no proper notice was issued as contemplated under the relevant provisions of law. The manner in which the proceedings are to be finalised under Section 17 D has been explained by this Court in the decision Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam & others [2009 (4) KHC 819]. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who fairly concedes to the legal position as above. 4. In the above circumstance, this Court finds that the impugned order cannot have any valid existence in the eye of law. Accordingly, Ext.P2 is set aside and the 2nd respondent or such other authority concerned, is directed to consider the matter afresh and finalize the assessment in accordance with the statutory requirements, also taking note of the observations made by this Court in the decision cited supra, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc