IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2010 / 22ND SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25428 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SMT.K.R.SUNITHA, PROPRIETOR, SUNITHA FOOTWEAR, TRIVARNA ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, COCHIN-682 026. BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------ 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, 2ND CIRCLE, KALAMASSERY AT PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-680 025. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM AT EDAPPALLY, COCHIN-682 024. 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 25428 of 2010-C ---------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging the correctness and sustainability of Ext.P3 notice issued under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act, whereby the petitioner has been directed to submit a statement of objections, if any, within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice, simultaneously mentioning that the petitioner will stand granted an opportunity of hearing the said matter within that period. Many a ground has been raised in the Writ Petition, challenging the course that is being pursued by the first respondent. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The course to be pursued with regard to the finalisation of the proceedings under Section 25 has been made clear by this Court as per the decision rendered in Suzion Infrastructure Service Ltd. V Commercial Tax Officer, (W.C), Ernakulam (2010(3) KHC 299), holding that such a composite notice is not enough. 4. In the above circumstances, the first respondent is directed to consider Ext.P4 objections and if it is felt that the W.P(C) No. 25428 of 2010-C 2 assessment proposal is to be pursued further, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity of hearing, before finalisation of the proceedings. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab