IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10438 of 2009(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- F.H.NAZEER AHAMMED, SON OF HUSSAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S.MALANAD ENTERPRISES, P.T.ROAD, BADAGARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 10438 of 2009-Y ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 is an order by which the registration of the petitioner under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act is cancelled. Petitioner challenges the same. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that it is a case where the court should interfere under Art.226 of the Constitution. It is pointed out that there are no grounds for cancellation of the registration. It is further pointed out that the filing of insolvancy petition is noted in the order. It is only on account of unavoidable circumstances, he contends. Learned counsel submits that if the petitioner is permitted to continue the business, the interest of the Revenue will not be jeoparadised and the petitioner will be in a position to make payments. 2. Learned Government Pleader on the other hand submits that the order is a well-considered order and in view of the admitted position that an insolvancy petition has been filed, the interest of the State will be affected if the petitioner is again permitted to continue the business. He also submits WPC No. 10438/2009 -2- that there is alternative remedy. No doubt, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the existing alternative remedy cannot be a bar and it is only a self imposed limitation. With regard to the apprehension of the petitioner that the appeal may not be effective remedy as the mechanism which existed previously for preferring the appeal is dismantled and the new mechanism is yet to take force, learned Government Pleader submits that the appellate authority will be notified within a week. I record this submission and relegate the petitioner to prefer appeal. If the appeal is preferred before the notified authority a decision will be taken thereon within a period of three weeks from the date on which the appeal is filed. Should there be an inordinate delay in the appellate forum being provided for, I reserve liberty to the petitioner to approach this court. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS