IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2010 / 21ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24774 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER --------------- MR. N. SALIM, BISMI AGENCIES, VELLAYANI JUNCTION, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. MR. JOSE JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, KVAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 35 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 018 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 24774 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 12th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT Aggrieved of Ext. P4 notice issued by the first respondent, under Section 25 of the KVAT Act, in respect of the assessment year 2008-'09, the petitioner had already preferred Ext. P5 statement of objection on 15.3.2010. Thereupon, yet another notice was issued on 2.7.2010, as borne by Ext. P6, proposing to finalize the assessment with reference to the facts and figures as given therein, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the reason stated for issuance of notices under Section 25 of the KVAT Act, is in view of Circulars produced and marked as Exts. P1 and P2, wherein it is stipulated that, the estimated sales turnover can be ascertained by adding 5 % gross profit to the conceded purchase turnover. The said stipulation is applicable only to estimate the sales price for collection of 'Advance tax', whereas the actual liability has to be fixed on the basis of the books of accounts during the course of assessment proceedings, submits the learned counsel. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Going by the materials on record, it is stated while issuing Ext. W.P. (C) No. 24774 of 2010 : 2 : P6 notice, that the turn over as conceded by the petitioner is not liable to be conceded accepted due to many a reason, including non- declaration of 'transportation charges' and such other aspects. It is also pointed out that the 'gross profit' conceded by the petitioner is @ 0.93 % and such other abysmally low rate is not in tune with the actuals with regard to the sale of the particular commodity. The explanation offered from the part of the petitioner is that, as per the agreement with the vendor, the 'transportation charges' were supposed to be met by the consignor effecting the delivery at the doors of the petitioner. 5. In any view of the matter, going by the contents of Ext. P6, the petitioner was given an opportunity to produce the books of accounts relating to the assessment year 2007-'08, inviting objections in respect of the proposal. In the said circumstances, it is for the petitioner to satisfy the concerned authority by filing the statement of objection and to produce the books of accounts, to have the proceedings finalized accordingly. 6. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Interference is declined and the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, taking note of the fact that, the time to satisfy the requirements in the impugned notices is already over, the petitioner W.P. (C) No. 24774 of 2010 : 3 : is granted a further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd