IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21996 of 2010(Y) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S.HOTEL BREEZELAND LTD., BYE-PASS JUNCTION, M.C.ROAD, VAZHAPPALLY P.O., CHANGANASSERY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI.JOSEPH CHERIAN. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, KOTTAYAM, PIN-586 001. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 1ST CIRCLE, CHANGANASSERY, PIN-686 101. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM, PIN-586 001. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 21996 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The case projected in the Writ Petition is that absolutely without any jurisdiction or competence, the 2nd respondent has issued Exts.P8 to P11 orders, whereby the orders in respect of the payment of tax under the compounding rate have been chosen to be revised suo-motu, that too after three years; for which there is absolutely no authority of law under any of the relevant provisions of the KGST Act. 2. The liability of the petitioner in respect of the various assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 was sought to be compounded availing benefit as provided and the due amounts have already been satisfied. After satisfaction of the liability as above, the 2nd respondent chose to take a ‘U turn’ and higher liability is sought to be fastened upon the petitioner alleging that there was a shop inspection for the year 2005-06, leading to imposition of penalty; which was substantially varied/reduced as per the verdict passed by this Court in S.T.Rev. 95/2010. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the reasoning given by the respondent is per se wrong and illegal. That apart, it is already brought to the notice of this Court that, the assessment as well 2 WP(C) No. 21996/2010 as the penalty in respect of the year 2005-06 have been separately subjected to challenge by way of appropriate proceedings and that the petitioner obtained substantial relief, which however does not form the subject matter of the present Writ Petition. 4. The case of the petitioner is that, the assessment authority does not have any power or competence to revise the compounding once effected. The only power, if at all any, is with regard to the power of rectification, which had to be invoked within a period of three years, which is not the position in the instant case. The learned Government Pleader submits that, the orders have been passed within three years; which however, is sought to be rebutted by the learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the 'Ground E' of the Writ Petition. In any view of the matter, being aggrieved of Exts.P8 to P11, the petitioner has already approached the appellate authority, availing the statutory remedy, by filing Ext.P12 to P15 appeals, along with Exts.P16 to P19 petitions for stay, which are pending consideration before the 1st respondent. It is without any regard to the pendency of the said proceedings that Exts.P20 to P23 notices have been issued by the 3rd respondent under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for immediate intervention. 5. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that this is a 3 WP(C) No. 21996/2010 matter which requires to be considered and finalized by the 1st respondent to put a finality to the issue. Accordingly, the 1st respondent is directed to consider and pass final orders on Exts.P12 to P15 appeals in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such orders are passed in the appeals, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P20 to P23 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc