IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6437 of 2010(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- V.M.ABDUL JALEEL, ADUKKALA SMART KITCHEN BUS STAND ROAD, KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR DIST. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), SQUAD NO.1,DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 3. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 6437 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 1st March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs: “i. To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to quash Ext. P5 notice issued by the 1st respondent. ii. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to delete the sentence “THE SALES FOR THREE MONTHS WAS Rs. 4 LAKHS (FOUR LAKHS ) ONLY” which was included in the statement, without the knowledge or consent of the petitioner. iii. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 1st respondent to pass orders as accepting the returns filed by the petitioner. iv. To pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem justified in the facts and circumstances of the case; and v. to award the cost of this proceedings to the petitioner. W.P.(C) No. 6437 OF 2010 2 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that issuance of Ext. P5 under Section 25 of the KVAT Act is without any regard to the actual facts and figures and needs to be interfered with by this Court on many a ground legal as well as factual. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits, on the basis of the materials on record that, the admitted facts do not require to be proved and that the petitioner himself had submitted Ext. P3 statement dated 09.06.2008 before the concerned authority stating that there was a fault/lapse on the part of the petitioner in maintaining the books of accounts on some or other reasons and that he was not aware of the legal obligations in not keeping the books of accounts . It is also stated in Ext.P3 that three month’s sale will give only about Rs.Four lakhs. Based on the said statement, Ext. P4 order was passed by the concerned officer, later followed by Ext. P5 notice issued under Section 25 of the KVAT Act. This being the position, absolutely no interference is warranted, submits the learned Government Pleader., 4. Obviously Ext.P5 is only a notice calling for objections, if any, to be submitted by the petitioner. It is a statutory notice before finalisation of the proceedings giving opportunity to the party W.P.(C) No. 6437 OF 2010 3 concerned and the petitioner is very much at liberty to substantiate his grievances by submitting the statement of objections also producing requisite materials in support of the claim. 5. In view of the above, no interference is warranted in this Writ Petition. However, since the time stipulated in Ext. P5 to submit objections is already over, the petitioner is granted a further time of two weeks for submitting the objections from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment so as to pursue further steps in response thereof. Interference is declined. The Writ Petition is dismissed. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk