IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2729 of 2011(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- GEORGE CHACKO, PULPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALLUNGAL, THALAKODU.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM-686693. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTHAMANGALAM,ERNAKULAM. PIN-686691. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD-IV, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY AT MINI CIVIL STATION, ALUVA-683101. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM-682015. BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.2729 of 2011-M ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011. J U D G M E N T As per Ext.P3 order, the petitioner was imposed with penalty under Section 47(6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act) to the tune of Rs.37,750/-. The proceedings was initiated pursuant to detention of a transport of 4000 Kgm of live chicken effected by the petitioner, allegedly without support of proper documents. It is stated that, against Ext.P3 order the petitioner had preferred statutory appeal before the 3rd respondent, as per Ext.P5. During pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner was now issued with notice proposing finalisation of assessment under Section 25(1), as evidenced from Ext.P2. 2. According to the petitioner, on receipt of Ext.P2, the petitioner sought adjournment by submitting Ext.P4 application, seeking two weeks time to file proper reply. Contention of the petitioner is that, if the assessment is finalised before disposal of Ext.P5 appeal, it will cause W.P(C) No.2729 of 2011-M 2 severe prejudice to interest of the petitioner. Hence the petitioner seeks direction for an early disposal of Ext.P5 appeal as well as for a direction to restrain the 1st respondent from passing orders on the basis of Ext.P2 notice, till the disposal of the appeal. 3. On a perusal of Ext.P2, it is noticed that the proposal for finalisation of assessment is not solely on the basis of Ext.P3 order. But the allegation is regarding a pattern of suppression detected and a best judgment assessment regarding the suppressed turnover, is proposed. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the disposal of the appeal has no relevance on the question regarding finalisation of the assessment. 4. However, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if the 3rd respondent is directed to have an early disposal of Ext.P5 appeal. At the same time, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to file objections against Ext.P2 notice and to co-operate with finalisation of the assessment. W.P(C) No.2729 of 2011-M 3 5. Under such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P5 appeal, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 6. It is made clear that, the petitioner will be at liberty to file objections against Ext.P2, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If any such objection is received, the 1st respondent can proceed with the proceedings for finalisation of the assessment. However, passing of final orders on the assessment shall be kept in abeyance till the disposal of Ext.P5 appeal by the 3rd respondent. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab