IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2011 / 21ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16419 of 2011(B) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.ABOOBACKER, PROPRIETOR,SHADHIL TRADERS VELLANCHERY,THRIKKANAPURAM,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ASSESSMENT), KVAT , SPECIAL CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM - 676 505. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,KERALA ,PUBLIC BUILDINGS, VIKAS BHAVAN PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE SECRETARY,TAXES DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 16419/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16/03/2011 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER CST ACT. P2: COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF LOCAL DELIVERY BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE AUDITOR OF THE PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF FORM-F DECLARATIONS PRODUCED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF FORM 26/FORM-15 DELIVERY NOTE PROVING THE PAYMENT TO TAX UNDER SECTION 6(2) OF THE ACT. P5: COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16/03/2011 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 25 (1) OF THE KVAT ACT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 16419 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 12th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext. P1 assessment order under the Central Sales-tax Act. The petitioner submits that although the petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of appeal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the same since the same is an arbitrary order insofar as the documents produced by the petitioner have not been properly adverted to. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. I am of opinion that the question of non-consideration of the documents produced by the petitioner can also be taken as a ground in the appeal to be filed against Ext. P1 assessment order. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file an appeal against Ext. P1 assessment order, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/