IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 20054 of 2011(F) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- M/S. ELAPPULLY ESSENTIAL OIL INDUSTRIES EDUPPUKULAM, ELAPPULLY, PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,M.K.SALIM. BY ADVS. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE, IIND CIRCLE PALAKKAD PIN 678 001. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 20054/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETIIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 DATED 23/03/2011. P2: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETIIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 DATED 05/04/2011. P3: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETIIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 DATED 14/06/2011. P4: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETIIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2004-05 DATED 14/06/2011. P5: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 DATED 20/06/2011. P6: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2004-05 DATED 20/06/2011. P7: COPY CO THE DEMAND NOTICE IN FORM NO.13 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 DATED 22/06/2011. P8: COPY CO THE DEMAND NOTICE IN FORM NO.13 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2004-05 DATED 22/06/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 20054 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 22nd day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Exts. P5 and P6 assessment orders and Exts. P7 and P8 demand notices. Primarily, the petitioner challenges the orders by-passing the alternate remedy by way of appeal on the ground that the orders of assessment are violative of of principles of natural justice insofar as the petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity of being heard and an opportunity to cross examine certain persons whose statements have been relied on by the assessing authority. The learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner had earlier approached this court and the assessing authority has been directed to pass fresh assessment orders after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, which has been done and after hearing the petitioner only the impugned orders have been passed. He further submits that the petitioner has not put in any application for cross examining of anybody as stated in the writ petition. 2. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 3. The petitioner has not been able to produce any material to show that the petitioner has requested for cross examination of anybody before the assessing authority. I am not satisfied that the petitioner's contention that the petitioner has not been given an opportunity of being heard is correct. In the above W.P(C) No. 20054 of 2011 -: 2 :- circumstances, the petitioner's remedy lies in filing an appeal against the impugned orders. Without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/