IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21502 of 2011(K) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S. MYTHRI METALS, B.NO.VIII/38A, ADAKKAPUTHUR, CHERPULASSERY, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY PARTNER T.K.ANAS. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.THANU PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALUK OFFICE, OTTAPPALAM-679 001. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, OTTAPPALAM-679 001. 3. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (INVESTIGATION BRANCH), COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.21502/2011 K APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.630 DTD. 15/02/2008 OF SUB REGISTRY, CHERPULASSERY. P2: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.3328 DTD. 23/06/2011 OF SUB REGISTRY, CHERPULASSERY. P3: COPY OF NOTICE NO.2011/33935/9 DTD. 11/07/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF ORDER NO.(IB(C)4/08-09 (FOR THE PERIOD OF 05/06 TO 07-08) DTD. 30/10/2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 21502 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 8th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of penalty imposed by the assessing authority under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased the establishment subsequent to the period for which the penalty is imposed and therefore the petitioner cannot be made liable for the penalty. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. As is clear from Ext.P3 order, the penalty has been imposed on M/s. Mythri Metals, Adakkaputhur, Cherplachery for the years 2005-2006 and 2007-2008. The petitioner in this writ petition is also Mythri Metals. Both the entities are the same and therefore the petitioner cannot challenge the penalty on the ground that the petitioner cannot be proceeded against for the penalty imposed. The petitioner's contention is that it was formerly a proprietary concern and now the same has been purchased by a partnership firm. But insofar as both the assessee as well as the petitioner are Mythri Metals, and the same all along was a running concern having continuity as an W.P(C) No. 21502 of 2011 -: 2 :- assessee, I do not think that the challenge can be countenanced. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/