IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 5540 of 2008(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ NADAVARAMBA BELL METAL HANDICRAFT ARTISAN SOCIETY, NADAVARAMBU HAVING REG. NO.524/90, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY VINCENT M.A., AGED 56, S/O.MALIEKKAL ANTONY GANDHI GRAM, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ADDL. BENCH, PALAKKAD. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY MUKUNDAPURAM. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER VELUKARA VILLAGE OFFICE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT. 6. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., TAXES DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.5540 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner submits that for the assessment year 1998- 1999 to 2002-2003 assessments were completed against which appeals were filed. The appeals were also considered by the Tribunal and were remanded. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that revised orders of assessment were not issued. However, the revenue recovery proceedings is being initiated against the property of the petitioner society. 3. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that once the matter was remanded by the Tribunal, notice was issued to the petitioner for producing documents. It is submitted that the documents were not produced and finally the revised assessment orders were issued on 22.1.2008. 4. Since, as stated by the learned Government Pleader revised assessment order have been issued, remedy available to the petitioner is invoke the appellate remedy provided for in the WPC5540/2008 2 statute. However, the petitioner complains that the recovery is continued on the basis of the original assessment orders that is now revised even according to the learned Government Pleader. Now that the assessment orders have been revised as stated above, it is necessary that the requisitions are also revised accordingly. If this has not been done so far, necessary action will be taken in this regard. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE csl