IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP.No. 25619 of 2001(Y) ----------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- C. KUNHIMOHAMMED, AGED, 60 S/O. ALAVI, CHETTITHODAYIL HOUSE, EZHUVANTHALA,OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD BY ADV. SRI.H.SIVARAMAN SRI.S.M.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SALES TAX OFFICER, WORKS CONTRACT, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. 2. APPELLATE ASST. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,(RR) OTTAPPALAM 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MANOJ P KUNJACHAN THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON 06/12/2011 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 25619 of 2001(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT.24.9.98 EXT.P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT.7.9.98 EXT.P3 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT.7.9.98 EXT.P4 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT.7.9.98 EXT.P5 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER DT.6.10.99 EXT.P6 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT.10.8.2001 EXT.P7 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT.10.8.2001 EXT.P8 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT.10.8.2001 EXT.P9 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT DT. NIL RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE jma K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OP.No. 25619 of 2001(Y) JUDGMENT 6th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2011 K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P No. 25619 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is before this Court challenging the recovery steps taken against him as per Exts.P6, P7 and P8, with respect to the tax due from the petitioner who was registered as a Works Contractor with the first respondent. Admittedly, Exts.P1 to P4 assessment orders were passed against the petitioner for the years 1991-92, 93-94, 96-97 and 97-98. The petitioner filed appeals from the assessment orders which culminated in common order Ext.P5 order being passed. By Ext.P5 the first appellate authority allowed the appeal of the petitioner for the year 1991-92 for the reason that the turnover is below the taxable limit and for all the other years assessments were confirmed. The petitioner has not challenged the first appellate order which has now become final. The case of the petitioner is that the Palakkad Municipality who was the awarder with respect to the various contracts executed by the petitioner during the said period has deducted tax at source and hence seeks only the relief of O.P No.25619/2001. : 2 : set off of the said amounts. This Court had by order dated 18.8.2010 directed the Commercial Taxes Officer, (Works Contract & Luxury Tax)Palakkad, to ascertain and submit as to whether the Palakkad Municipality has in fact, remitted the amounts referred to in Ext.P9 statement. Pursuant to this the Commercial Tax Officer has by letter dated 17.9.2010 informed the Deputy Commissioner(Law) that the Palakkad Municipality had deducted an amount of Rs.23,150/- for the year 1991-92 to 1996-97 and Rs.6612/- for the year 97-98 towards the tax due under works contract executed by the petitioner and has remitted the same to the Government. In the said circumstances, as also considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, the Commercial Tax Officer, (Works contract &Luxury Tax) Palakkad is directed to grant the petitioner set off for the amounts paid by the Palakkad Municipality against the tax dues of the petitioner as also the amount of Rs.10000/- paid pursuant to Interim Orders passed by this court and fix the liability of the petitioner, if any and issue orders within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. It goes without saying that any amounts remaining due from O.P No.25619/2001. : 3 : the petitioner, will be remitted within two months thereafter or by any instalments granted by the concerned officer. In the circumstances of the orders passed in the above writ petition the recovery steps taken against the petitioner by Ext.P6,P7 and P8 shall stand set aside. The petitioner's liability fixed above, if not realised in the manner provided hereinabove, shall be recovered by due process of law. Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge