IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 26488 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ CRYPTM CONFECTIONERS (INDIA) PVT.LTD., KANJIRAMPARA ROAD, THODUPUZHA - 685 584 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR VARGHESE THOMAS. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.K.UMAMAHESWAR RESPONDENT: -------------------- THE ASST.COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, THODUPUZHA - 685584. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 26488 OF 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Challenge in this Writ Petition is against Exts.P12 to P14 orders of assessment, finalized under Section 25 (1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). In view of availability of an effective alternative remedy by way of statutory appeal, this Court may not be inclined to interfere with orders of assessments, in normal circumstances. But in the case at hand, the petitioner alleges non-compliance of mandatory procedures required under Section 25 (1) of the KVAT Act. It is complained that the assessments were finalized in total violation of principles of natural justice, to the extent that objections submitted against the proposals were not at all adverted to by the assessing authority. It is also contended that no opportunity of personal hearing was afforded before finalizing the assessment. 2. It is noticed that Exts.P2 to P4, P8 and P9 are 2 WP(C) No. 26488/2010 notices issued intimating proposals for finalization of the assessments. The petitioner was called upon to file objections if any against such proposals, within the time stipulated therein. According to the petitioner, objections were filed as per Exts.P5 to P7, P10 and P11. On perusal of the impugned orders of assessment, it is revealed that receipt of such objections is admitted. It is mentioned that the contentions of the petitioner with respect to the rate of tax could not be accepted. But learned counsel for the petitioner points out that contentions raised in the objections were not adverted to by the appellate authority in its real perspective. It is noticed that there is no elaborate discussions on the issue raised with respect to rate of tax applicable. Apart from that, it is pertinent to note that no opportunity of hearing was afforded after filing the objections. 3. Going by provisions contained in Section 25 (1) of the KVAT Act, as settled through decision of this Court in 3 WP(C) No. 26488/2010 Suzion Infrastructure Services Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer [2010 (3) KHC 299], it is mandatory on the part of the assessing authority to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing, after receipt of the objections, before finalizing the assessment. Since there is no evidence for compliance of such mandatory requirements, I am of the opinion that the impugned assessments are unsustainable in the eye of law. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and Exts.P12 to P14 orders are hereby quashed. Respondent is directed to finalise the assessments afresh, after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, for a personal hearing and for production of documents. The fresh assessment as directed above shall be finalized at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc