IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 1839 of 2005(R) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- KOCHI REFINERIS LIMITED, AMBALAMUGAL, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL, MANAGER (F & A), P.K.SURESH. BY ADV.SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, ADV.SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, ADV.SMT.PRIYA MAHESH, ADV.SMT.PRIYA MANJOORAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSMT)IV, SPECIAL CIRCLE -II, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY. 3. SALES TAX OFFICER (WC & LT), O/O.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY(TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.P. PRADEEP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1839/2005-R: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 07/07/2003 ISSUED BY THE SALES TAX OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 06/02/2004 ISSUED BY THE SALES TAX OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 27/02/2004 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SALES TAX OFFICER. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 30/09/2004 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 18/11/2004 ISSUED BY THE SALES TAX OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE R.3. TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 29/12/2004. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE CLARIFICATION ISSUED BY THE CENTRE DTD. 18/08/2004. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C). No.1839/2005-R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Ext.P6 the petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the same. 2. The petitioner is a dealer in petroleum products. The company has entered into agreements for performing several items of works with various contractors. Initially, under Sub Section (7B) of Section 7 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, the petitioner was deducting from source and remitting tax before the third respondent or before the authorities where the contractors were registered. This Court, in the decision reported in Siemens Ltd. vs. State of Kerala and others [(2002) 128 STC 452] declared Sub Section (7B) of Section 7 and Rule 22A(2) of the K.G.S.T Act and Rules as ultra vires. Subsequently, Section (7C) was introduced vide Finance Act 2003. The petitioner is taking the stand that it was not required to deduct tax on all contracts as the Section does not contemplate deduction of tax at source for all contracts. The present dispute arose when the third respondent served a notice on 06/02/2004 calling upon the petitioner to furnish details of payments made to the contractors to take action for W.P.(C).NO.1839/2005-R -:2:- escapement of tax. A reply was given as per Ext.P3 and, ultimately, by Ext.P6, the third respondent informed that the petitioner may invite penal action if any further default in not remitting the tax is taken. Various arguments have been raised for challenging Ext.P6. 3. The learned Government Pleader stated that Ext.P6 is only a notice and if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, he can file objections to the same in accordance with law. Therefore, it is upto the petitioner to file detailed objection to Ext.P6 explaining its stand and also to satisfy the concerned authority about their position. The petitioner is directed to file a detailed objection to Ext.P6 within a period of six weeks from today and the third respondent will consider the matter on merits and communicate his decision to the petitioner expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge ms