IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1074 of 2011(H) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- M/S.ORIENT HARDWARES & SANITATIONS, AMALA COMPLEX, BYEPASS ROAD, NEARRAILWAY STATION, CHANGANACHERRY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, GOGY VARGHESE. BY ADVS. SRI.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH SRI.J.JULIUS SMITH SRI.K.S.ROCKY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-1, CHANGANACHERRY - 686 101. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.1074 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 notice issued by the respondent proposing to impose penalty on the petitioner under Section 67(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act), on the basis of an allegation that the petitioner had failed to remit the tax amount, interest and penal interest, along with the revised return filed by him, consequent to the Audit Report. 2. According to the petitioner, since the revised return was filed voluntarily, the petitioner is not liable for payment of any interest or penal interest. However, against Ext.P3 notice, the petitioner had submitted detailed objections as evidenced from Ext.P4. I am of the view that it is for the respondent to consider such objections and to take appropriate decision, after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate such contentions through production of documents and also after affording an opportunity of personal hearing. Therefore, it is highly premature for this court to take WP(C).1074/11 2 a decision regarding validity of Ext.P3. I do not find any reason to presume that the respondent will finalise the proceedings in violation of the mandatory procedures and in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider Ext.P4 and to take appropriate decision thereof after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to produce documents in support of his claim and also after affording an opportunity of personal hearing. 4. A decision in this regard shall be taken as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb