IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2010 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36095 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S. N.V. CHETTIAR, 7/773, S.M. STREET, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI.V. THYAGARAJAN. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE-II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE 673001. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.36095 of 2010-J ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T Ext.P3 order of assessment completed under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act), with respect to the year 2009-10, is under challenge in this writ petition. According to the petitioner the assessment was finalized in flagrant violation of the procedure contemplated under the statue and also in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence the assessment is challenged without resorting to statutory remedy by way of appeal. 2. It is pointed out that after filing of the objections to the pre-assessment notice, the matter was finalized without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is contended that a personal hearing as contemplated under the statute, after filing of the objections to the proposal, is not an empty formality and that any failure to provide such an opportunity will vitiate the order W.P(C) No.36095 of 2010-J 2 of assessment. In this regard the petitioner points out a recent decision of this Court in Suzion Infrastructure Service Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer (W.C), Ernakulam (2010(3) KHC 299 (Ker ). 3. Going by contents of the impugned order, it is not reflected that any such opportunity of hearing was afforded after filing of the objections. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondent also concede these aspects. Therefore I of the view that the assessment order is unsustainable in the eye of law. 4. Accordingly the writ petition is allowed and Ext.P3 is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent for passing fresh orders after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Orders in this regard shall be issued by the 1st respondent as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab //True Copy//