IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 20011 of 2011(B) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- T.K.I. AHAMED SHERIF, PROPRIETOR, M/S.PUTHENPURAYIL CRUSHERS, CHALAKAL, MARAMPILLY.P.O, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.THANU PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ALUVA - 682 301. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 20011/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF NOTICE NO.32150748104/07-08 DATED 31/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF REPLY WITH FORM NO.1D DATED 08/01/2010 PRESENTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF ORDER NO.32150748104/07-08 DATED 14/01/2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF ORDER KVATA NO.1598/2010 DATED 28/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEAL) ERNAKULAM. P5: COPY OF ORDER KVATA NO.123/2010 DATED 28/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEAL) ERNAKULAM. P6: COPY OF ORDER NO.32150748104/2007-08 DATED 27/06/2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 20011 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 22nd day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. He wanted to opt for pay compounded tax. But the petitioner's request in this regard was rejected by Ext. P6 order. The petitioner challenges Ext. P6 order on the ground that the petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity of being heard, which is specifically provided in section 8 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. Ext. P 6 does not refer to any notice or hearing to the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader also could not satisfy me that the petitioner was afforded an opportunity of being heard before passing Ext. P6 order. The proviso to Section 8 (f)(ii) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act clearly provides for an opportunity of being heard if the assessing authority intends to refuse to an assessee to pay compounded tax. Rule 11(2)(ii) also provides that if the application for paying compounded tax is not in order, the assessing authority shall reject the application, for reasons to be recorded in writing and after giving the dealer an opportunity of being heard. It is also specifically provided that such order shall be with prior approval of the District Deputy Commissioner. That being so, Ext. P6 order is clearly in violation of the said provisions of the statute. Therefore, Ext. P6 order is quashed. The respondent assessing authority is directed to re-consider the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and W.P(C) No. 20011 of 2011 -: 2 :- complying with the provisions of section 8 of the Act and Rule 11(2)(ii) of the Rules, expeditiously. The writ petition is allowed as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/