IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 OP.No. 12149 of 2002(U) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S.KALPETTA PLANTATIONS, REP. BY KURUVILA GEORGE, KALPETTA NOTH P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ADDL. APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE. 2. AGRL. INCOME TAX AND SALES TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, VYTHIRI AT KALPETTA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NO.20845/2002 IN OP NO.12149/2002 DISMISSED: 8.2.2008 SD/-(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF R1 IN AITA NO.259, 260/92 DT.10.4.92. P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF R2 DT.31.12.98. P3: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF R2 DT.30.3.01. P4: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE FOR R.R. PROCEEDING DT.16.4.02. P5: TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN AITA NO.27/92 PASSED BY ADDL. APPELLATE ASST. COMMISSIONER, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE DT.23.9.98. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R2(a): TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.11.9.02 OF THE APPELLATE ASST.COMMR., COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... O.P. No.12149 of 2002 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT The O.P. is filed challenging Ext.P3 order whereunder the Assessing Officer recalled an earlier order namely, Ext.P2 issued based on copy of the appellate order namely, Ext.P1 produced on behalf of the petitioner before the Assessing Officer. Even though the Assessing Officer believing Ext.P1 as a true copy of the appellate order revised the assessments for 1986-87 and 1987-88 vide Ext.P2, he later noticed that Ext.P1 was a bogus order and consequently he rectified Ext.P2 through Ext.P3 proceedings. If Ext.P1 is not a genuine order, then the Assessing Officer is perfectly justified in rectifying a mistaken order passed to give effect to the bogus order produced by or on behalf of the petitioner. Government Pleader submitted that the bogus order namely, Ext.P1 was produced by the Chartered Accountant who appeared for the petitioner. If the Chartered Accountant has produced a bogus appellate order, then enquiry and appropriate action is called for by the Institute of Chartered Accountants against him. Government Pleader reported that against the same Chartered Accountant, enquiry is initiated in other cases also. In the circumstances, I direct 2 respondents 1 and 2 to verify the records once again, identify the appeal filed by the petitioner and the orders passed thereon for the year 1986-87 or for both years and if the Chartered Accountant is found to have produced bogus order based on which Ext.P3 is issued, there will be direction to the first respondent to launch a complaint against the Chartered Accountant concerned to the Institute of Chartered Accountants for taking appropriate action. The first respondent will also recommend to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to prohibit the Chartered Accountant from appearance before the departmental officers, if he is found to be involved in fraud. In any case so far as demand of tax is concerned, there will be direction to the second respondent to pass revised orders based on genuine appellate orders obtained from the appellate authority. An action taken report should be filed by the first respondent in this court within four months from now. The O.P. is disposed of as above. Issue copy to Government Pleader also. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms