IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 31960 of 2010(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.P. MARY, PROPRIETRIX, P.P. TRADERS, MANANTHAVADY-670 645. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MANANTHAWADY, WAYANAD - 670 645. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31960 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 and P3A orders of assessment issued under the provisions of Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act), on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded with an opportunity of hearing before completion of the assessment. It is evident that the proposal regarding assessment was communicated to the petitioner and she had filed objections to such proposal. It is further evident from the impugned orders that the assessing authority had considered such objections and taken a decision thereon. But it is mandatory on the part of the assessing authority to afford an opportunity of personal hearing before finalising the assessment on the basis of the objections. Denial of such an opportunity will vitiate the proceedings is the dictum laid by this court in Suzion Infrastructure Service Ltd. Vs. C.T.O. (2010 (3) KHC 299). Even otherwise, the assessing authorities are bound to adhere to principles of natural justice while finalising the assessment. On the above limited W.P.(C).31960/10-T -2- aspect of the matter, I am of the opinion that the impugned orders of assessment are not sustainable in the eye of law. Hence I am of the view that the matter need be remitted back to the assessing authority for taking fresh decision. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and Ext.P3 and P3A are hereby quashed. The 1st respondent is directed to re-consider the matter and to complete the assessment afresh, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Needless to say that the petitioner will be at liberty to produce Books of Accounts and other documents in support of the objections already raised. 3. The respondent will finalise the assessment in compliance with the above directions as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb