IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 WA.No.1678 of 2008 ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.21321/2008 Dated 22/07/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- SURYA ROCK PRODUCTS, NEELEESWARAM P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, P.M.ANTONY. BY ADV. SRI.VIJAYAN. K.U. SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ANGAMALY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED REFIQ. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ----------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1678 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The orders of assessment passed by the assessing authority for the assessment years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (“Act” for short) was the subject matter of W.P.(C) No.21321 of 2008. The learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition and has permitted the petitioner to prefer appeals if he is so advised, against the re-assessment order passed by the assessing authority. 2. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner in the writ petition has presented this writ appeal. 3. Admittedly, orders of assessment have been passed by the assessing authority for the assessment years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. Thereafter, after issuing appropriate notice under Section 19 (1) of the Act and after considering the objections filed by the petitioner to the said notice, the assessing authority has passed orders under Section 19 of the Act and, thereby, has brought to tax the escaped W.A.No.1678/2008 -2- turnover. The correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the assessing authority ought to have been questioned before the Forum created under the Statute itself. Bypassing that remedy the petitioner should not have filed the writ petition before this Court. Keeping this aspect of the matter in view and also the observations of the Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa Vs. Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. and another {1985 (60) STC 213}, the learned Judge has rightly rejected the writ petition and has relegated the petitioner to prefer appeal against the re-assessment orders passed by the assessing authority for the assessment years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. 4. In our view, the learned Single Judge has not committed any error, whatsoever, which would call for our interference. Accordingly, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS