IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17963 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------ IBRAHIM NEEROLPAN, PATHEPIRIYAM POST, EDAVANA 676 541. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB) II, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE 673001 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), SPECIAL CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM 676 505 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE 673 009. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 17963 OF 2008 L -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P8 series of penalty notices. A mandamus is also sought to direct the first respondent to proceed to complete Ext.P8 series proceedings only after enabling the petitioner to cross examine the witnesses suggested by him in Exts.P9 and P10. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner, is as follows: Petitioner is a Partner of "Friends Timbers" at Edavanna engaged in the business of plywood, wood polish, etc. and an assessee under the second respondent. Petitioner's Firm has been filing returns and remitting tax in respect of its business. Meanwhile, on the basis of a statement alleged to have been given by one Shri K. Alavi, Proprietor, K.A. Glass Traders, Manjeri, the first respondent issued Ext.P1 notice to the petitioner. Petitioner is faced with Section 45A notice of the Kerala General Tax Act. Thereafter, the first respondent also WPC. NO.17963/08 L 2 issued a revised notice vide Ext.P3. Against Exts.P1 and P3, petitioner filed Exts.P4 and P5 replies denying the allegations against him. Thereafter, petitioner was served with three separate penalty notices under Section 45A of the KGST Act vide Exts.P8, P8(a) and P8(b) against which the petitioner filed Ext.P9 objection. Though the petitioner filed Ext.P10 for perusal of certain records, it was denied. In the meantime, the second respondent initiated Section 19C proceedings against the petitioner and others. Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is not at all involved in the business as alleged in collaboration with the persons as mentioned in the statement filed by Shri K.Alavi. He has a further case that at any rate, when notice is issued under Section 45A and that is not brought to its logical conclusion, proceedings should not have been commenced under Section 19C. Ext.P8 series are notices issued under Section 45A (1)(b) of the KGST Act, 1963. The further complaint of the petitioner is that documents are going to be relied on by the respondents without giving him copies of WPC. NO.17963/08 L 3 the same, and it will amount to breach of the principles of natural justice. Petitioner has filed applications for cross examining the witnesses. 3. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. I am not inclined to interfere with Exts.P8 series which are only notices calling upon the petitioner to answer the allegations against him. There cannot be any dispute that the Authority who issued Ext.P8 series notices has the jurisdiction to issue such notices. The Writ Petition is disposed of directing that the first respondent will, if he purports to rely on any document which is to be used against the petitioner, it will be made available to the petitioner. Further, in view of the fact that the petitioner has sought a right to cross examine the witnesses, a decision will be taken on Exts.P9 and P10 in accordance with law, before a decision is taken in the matter of imposing of penalty. Sd/= kbk K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE // True copy//