IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 26TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9597 of 2007(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- KRUPA INDUSTRIES, PERUMPANACHY P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, THOMAS V.ATHIRAMPUZHA, CHANGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR SRI.BENNY ANTONY PAREL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IST CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, CHANGANACHERRY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.P. PRADEEP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) 9597/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 21132377/2001-02 DATED 1.6.2006 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 21132377/2002-03 DATED 1.6.2006. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT NO. 21132377/2001-02 DATED 19.9.2006. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT NO. 21132377/2002-03 DATED 30.9.2006. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY PREFERRED BY THE PETITIOER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 9.3.2007. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE. KNC/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. = = = = = = = = == = = = == = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 9597 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging the recovery proceedings pursued by the respondents pursuant to Exts.P5 and P6 assessment orders in respect of the assessment years 2001-2002 and 2002-2003. It is also the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred Exts.P7 and P8 petitions for rectification of the error apparent on the face of the record and seeks for a direction to have the said proceedings considered and finalised and to keep the recovery proceedings in abeyance till such time. 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 3.4.2007, the writ petition was admitted and an interim order was passed directing the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P7 and P8 petitions for rectification, simultaneously intercepting the coercive proceedings in respect of movable properties. As such, the relief sought for in the writ petition has been substantially granted and the petitioner has not filed any further proceeding in the form of interlocutory application or otherwise, if he is aggrieved in any manner. WP(C) 9597/2007 2 In the above circumstance, no further orders are called for and the writ petition is closed. It is also made clear that this verdict will not stand in the way of the petitioner in approaching the concerned authorities for availing the benefit of 'Amnesty Scheme', which is available till 31.12.2010, if any liability is still subsisting. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) KNC/-