IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32558 of 2010(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- T.P. POULOSE, THELAKKAT HOUSE, AIROORPADAM, KOTTAPPADY, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER I, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DT.-686 691. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD VIII, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682 015. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM-682 015. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 32558 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 8th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 notice issued under section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Assessment for the year 2007-'08 was proposed to be finalized on rejecting the return filed, on the ground that the Intelligence Squad imposed penalty to the tune of Rs.32,500/- based on interception of a transport effected by the petitioner. 2. Contention of the petitioner is that, against the order imposing penalty (Ext.P6), the petitioner had already approached the appellate authority (the 3rd respondent) by filing Ext.P7 appeal and the said appeal is pending consideration and disposal. Hence the petitioner is seeking direction to restrain the assessing authority (1st respondent) to keep in abeyance finalization of the assessment pursuant to Ext.P3 notice, till disposal of the appeal. W.P.(C) No. 32558/2010 2 3. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. It is submitted that subsequent to Ext.P3 notice, the 1st respondent had finalized the order of assessment, since the petitioner had failed to submit any objections/reply. However, it is conceded that the proceedings in this regard has not been despatched, in view of an interim order passed by this Court on 26-10-2010. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if the 3rd respondent is directed to have an expeditious disposal of Ext.P7 appeal and the 1st respondent is directed to keep in abeyance completion of the assessment till the disposal of the appeal. 5. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C) No. 32558/2010 3 6. The 1st respondent is directed to keep in abeyance finalization of the assessment pursuant to Ext.P3 notice, till such time orders are passed by the 3rd respondent on Ext.P7 appeal. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be provided with an opportunity to file objection and an opportunity of personal hearing before completing the assessment. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.