IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 14343 of 2011(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- NELSAMON C.L., S/O.C.P.LONA (LATE), AGED 35 YEARS, CHIRAYATH HOUSE, P.O.ANTHIKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.C.JAMES SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 4TH CIRCLE, THRSSUR-04. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INVESTIGATION BRANCH, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR-4. 3. THE TAHSILDAR RR., THRISSUR-20. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 14343 of 2011(P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 12/3/2007 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S. RULES 17(4), 20, 20A AND 21 OF THE K.G.S.T. RULES, 1963. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 23/5/2007. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 12/3/2007. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ATTACHED TO EXT.P4. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 23/5/2007. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 20/11/2007. EXT.P8 : COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 23/4/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 14343 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 7th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges orders of assessment passed by the assessing authority under the Kerala General Sales-tax Act. This court passed the following interim order on 27.5.2011: “Petitioner is at liberty to file statutory appeal against Ext. P1 & P4 and to seek appropriate interim relief. Confirmation of sale if any takes place on the basis of Ext. P8 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of 3 weeks in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the appellate authority.” The learned counsel for the petitioner could not tell me whether appeals have been filed as per the interim order. Since the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to avail of statutory remedies by way of appeal, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/