IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31403 of 2011(A) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- ABDUL JALEEL.N.K., AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. BAPPUTTY, PROPRIETOR, M/S. JAY 'N" JAY ENTERPRISES, MALABAR GATE, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.ZAKEER HUSSAIN SRI.V.TEKCHAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB)-1, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(INTELLIGENCE) COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR) KOZHIKODE-673001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT.PLEADER SHOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JM WP(C).No. 31403 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25-8-2008. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.37835 OF 2008 DATED 19-12-2008. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08-04-2011. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICES DATED 31-05-2011 & P6. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : ANNEX. R1 (A):COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ANNEX.R1 (B): COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE \\ TRUE COPY\\ PA TO JUDGE JM S.SIRI JAGAN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)NO. 31403 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of December 2011 --------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT By Ext.P1 order, the first respondent imposed penalty under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, on the petitioner for non-maintenance of accounts. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order. The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded to the first respondent for reconsideration. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that, despite the remand, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated by Ext.P5 for recovery of the penalty amount. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs: a. Call for records leading to Ext.P5 & P6 and quash the same by a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order as direction. b. Declare Ext.P5 & P6 notices as illegal and unsustainable in the eye of law. c. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 1st respondent to pass orders pursuant to Ext.P4 order forthwith after hearing the petitioner. d. Any other reliefs or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the above cases. 2. The learned Government Pleader has filed a statement wherein it is stated thus: 2 “1. The above writ petition is filed seeking for a prayer to quash Ext.P5 and P6 notice and also for a direction to the first respondent to pass orders pursuant to Ext.P4. 2. When the matter came up for admission, this Hon'ble Court directed me to take instruction. On instruction, it is humbly submitted that Ext.P5 and P6 demand notices are not against Ext.P1 order and that Ext.P5 and P6 are issued on the basis of the assessment order dated 08/09/2010. True copy of the assessment order dated 08/09/2010 passed by the 1st respondent for the period of 2005-2006 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R1(a). The notice of Demand was also issued to the petitioner. The true copy of the Notice of Demand is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R1(b). The assessment order and the notice of demand was served on the petitioner on 17/09/2010. The petitioner is liable to pay the amount demanded. 3. Hence the writ petition is without any merits and it is liable to be dismissed with costs.” In view of the above statement and Ext. R1(a) and R1(b), it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies against those orders this writ petition may be closed. Ordered accordingly. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE STU 3 4