IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2008 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8717 of 2008(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ REHABILITATION PLANTATIONS LTD. PUNALUR 691 305,KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR JOSE SEBASTIAN. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIL TAXES, KOTTARAKKARA 691 506 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES) GOVERNMENT OF KERALA SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. BY SHRI.A.J.VARGHESE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.8717 OF 200 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is an assessee under the Agricultural Income Tax Act for the year 2005-2006. The petitioner did not pay interest for delayed payment of advance tax, although the petitioner was served with a notice of demand under Section 37 (4) of the Act demanding interest. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner filed an application for waiver of interest before the 2nd respondent detailing reasons why the advance tax was not paid in time. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent has rejected the application and confirmed the demand for interest by Ext.P3 order. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 order. One of the contentions raised by the petitioner is that before passing Ext.P3 order, the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard. 2. The learned Government pleader could not satisfy me that Ext.P3 order was passed after affording an opportunity of W.P.(c)No.8717/08 2 being heard to the petitioner. Although he tried to justify Ext.P3 as only a notice proposing to impose interest, from Ext.P3, I find that the demand for interest has been confirmed. Therefore, I am satisfied that Ext.P3 order has been issued in violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, Ext.P3 is quashed. However, I make it clear that it would be open to the 2nd respondent to pass orders afresh, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.8717/08 3