IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1930 RP.No. 1031 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.22042/2008 Dated 24/07/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS: RESPONDENTS IN WPC: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE-III, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KAKKADNAD, KOCHI-30. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.P.N. SANTHOSH RESPONDENT: PETITIONER WPC: ------------------------------------ M/S.HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, ALUPURAM P.O., KALAMASSERY (FORMERLY INDIAN ALUMINUM CO.) REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT E.C.JOSE. BY ADV. SMT.S.K. DEVI. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. GIRI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P. No. 1031 OF 2008 IN WPC No. 22042 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of November, 2008 O R D E R The assessing authority has filed the review petition on the ground that while pronouncing the judgment on 24.07.08, this Court has proceeded on the premise that the petitioner is entitled to a separate notice of demand pursuant to Ext.P3 order passed by the assessing authority. It is contended that the rectification was effected, in tune with the original order of assessment, which was modified by the appellate authority. It is contended that while passing an order of assessment, the assessing authority did not take note of the fact that even originally a provision for interest was made with effect from 01.05.99. 2. I do not think this is a matter for review. A notice of demand will have to be served either along with or pursuant to the rectified order. If rectification was effected by providing for levy of interest from the date mentioned in the original order passed by the R.P. No.1031/08 IN W.P.C.No. 22042 OF 2008 -:2:- assessing authority, then obviously a notice of demand will have to reflect the rectified order. In such circumstances, if the assessee is aggrieved by Ext.P3, then obviously it is up to the assessee to prosecute an appeal. If there is any error in the notice of demand, that is also a matter which can be urged before the appellate authority. In these circumstances, I do not find any reason to entertain the review. Hence the Review Petition is dismissed. (V. GIRI, JUDGE) ttb R.P. No.1031/08 IN W.P.C.No. 22042 OF 2008 -:3:-