IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST APRIL 2009 / 1ST VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 12399 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.KUNHALANKUTTY, ASIAN INDUSTRIES, ANAKKAYAM, RESIDING AT KURUNYAN HOUSE, P.O.OTHUKUNGAL, THIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MANJERI. 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.12399 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated: APRIL 21, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 notice issued to the petitioner under sec.43(1) of the KGST Act, 1963 and Ext.P5 circular No.40/2008 dated 6.10.2008 in respect of the petitioner's eligibility for the benefit of sec.23B of the KGST Act. Sec.23B provides for an Amnesty Scheme, whereby arrears of tax or other amounts due from assessees for the period ending on 31st March 2005 can be settled by availing of reduction at the rates mentioned in sec.23B. Petitioner submits that Ext.P5 circular cannot govern the issue in so far as that has been issued only on 6.10.2008, whereas the petitioner's eligibility under sec.23B has already been decided prior to that date. In fact, by Ext.P3 judgment this Court recorded the fact that orders have been passed on the petitioner's application under sec.23B and therefore the petitioner's eligibility cannot be reviewed on the basis of that circular, is the contention of the petitioner. The W.P.(C).No.12399 of 2009 2 petitioner therefore submits that the 1st respondent cannot now invoke sec.43(1) of the KGST Act by issuing Ext.P4 notice in the guise of rectification of the earlier order. 2. I am of opinion that these are all matters which the petitioner has to submit before the 1st respondent while replying to Ext.P4 order. It would be open to the petitioner to take all contentions available to him in the matter while replying to Ext.P4 notice. The 1st respondent is bound to consider all those objections and pass a reasoned order dealing with each and every contention of the petitioner. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. I make it clear that I have not considered the challenge against Ext.P5 circular on merits in this writ petition. The same is left open to be agitated by the petitioner if the order pursuant to the show cause notice is adverse to the petitioner. The petitioner shall file objections to Ext.P4 within one week. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE mt/-