IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19153 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.SHINE ROTOPACKS, 2/679, COCHIN UNIVERSITY, KALAMASSERY-682 022. BY ADV. MR. K.J.ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS: --------------- THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, I CIRCLE, KALAMASSERY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 19153 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 29th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuing a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to consider Exts.P4 and P4 (a) and to issue 'C forms' . It is highlighted at many a place in the Writ Petition, as well as in the affidavit filed in response to the statement filed by the respondent, that the petitioner is very much entitled to pursue the business and that the issuance of 'C form' to a registered dealer cannot be a matter of grace from the part of the respondents. The relative rights and liabilities have also been asserted in paragraph 5 of the affidavit dated 23.7.2009 stating that, there cannot be denial to issue 'C forms' doubting the chance to have them misused at the hands of petitioner, that too, absolutely without any basis and if at all any misuse is there, it is stated that, the Commercial Tax Officer cannot transpose himself as a policeman, to regulate the conduct of the assessee and hence that the petitioner is very much entitled to get it as a matter of right. 2.The learned Government Pleader, with specific reference to the contents of the statement filed on behalf of the respondent submits that, the inspection conducted by the departmental authorities revealed that, there was quite a lot of incriminating circumstances to doubt the WP (C) No. 19153 of 2009 : 2 : transactions being pursued by the petitioner as a 'shady one' and that the enquiry revealed that, the address given by the petitioner was not at all correct and that the petitioner was acting as a 'tool' at the hands of somebody else behind the curtain. It is also pointed out that, because of the nature of transaction being pursued by the petitioner and the prayer sought for, if allowed, will naturally entail loss to the revenue. The learned Government Pleader further submits with reference to paragraph 3 of the affidavit dated 23.7.2009 filed by the petitioner that the petitioner has conceded before this Court that they do not have any business transaction; that they have closed down the business and that the only attempt was to complete the dealings with the suppliers as well as with the clients. It is also stated therein that the petitioner would like to have necessary 'C forms' in connection with the period 2007 - '08, which shows that the request now made in the present Writ Petition is for a direction to issue 'C forms not in connection with the 'ongoing' transaction but in connection with transaction effected 1 - 2 years back, particularly when the returns were filed by the petitioner way back on 31.3.2008. 3. In the above facts and circumstances, there is absolutely no tenable ground to call for interference. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd