IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 14TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2836 of 2011(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER:- ------------------ K.HUMAYOON, PROPRIETOR, HUMAYOON ASSOCIATES, MEENCHANDA, OPP.R.K.MISSION HOSPITAL, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA RESPONDENTS:- --------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE-I, KOZHIKODE-673001. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOZHIKODE-673001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.2836 of 2011-D. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ext.P5 notice issued proposing finalisation of an escaped assessment, with respect to the year 2007-'08, is under challenge in this writ petition. According to the petitioner, the assessment was sought to be reopened on the basis of Exts.P1, P1(a) and P1(b) orders through which penalty was imposed against the petitioner, under Section 47(6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. It is stated that, aggrieved by Exts.P1 series orders, the petitioner had already preferred statutory appeals before the 3rd respondent as evidenced from Exts.P2 to P4. Grievance of the petitioner is that, if the assessment proposed through Ext.P5 is finalised pending disposal of the above said appeals, that will cause severe prejudice. It is brought to my notice that the petitioner had already WP(C).No.2836 of 2011-D. -: 2 :- submitted objections against the proposal in question, as evidenced from Ext.P6, and he had requested for deferring finalisation of the proceedings till the disposal of Exts.P2 to P4 appeals. Since it is apprehended that such request will not be acceded to, this writ petition is filed. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am of the view that, interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the 3rd respondent to dispose of the appeals on an early basis and till then to restrain the first respondent from finalising the assessment. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Exts.P2 to P4 appeals, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. 4. The first respondent is directed to keep in WP(C).No.2836 of 2011-D. -: 3 :- abeyance finalisation of assessment on the basis of Ext.P5 till the appeals are disposed of by the 3rd respondent as directed above. 5. Needless to say that first respondent shall take note of the outcome of the appeals while finalising the assessment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, (Judge) Kvs/-