← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/8899/2015disposed of

Sulthan Gold Classic(P)Ltd v. The Asst.Commissioner(Kvat)

2015-03-20Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/29TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 8899 of 2015 (J) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- SULTHAN GOLD CLASSIC(P)LTD KOTACHERY, KANHANGAD P.O.

KASARAGOD DIST., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI.T.M.ABDUL RAUF.

BY ADVS.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.K.UMAMAHESWAR RESPONDENT(S):

---------------------------- THE ASST.COMMISSIONER (KVAT) COMMERCIAL TAXES, KASARAGOD - 671121.

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 8899 of 2015 (J) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P-1: COPY OF ORDER DATED 26.6.2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S. 8 FOR THE YEAR 2013 - 14.

EXT.P-2: COPY OF ORDER DATED 16.7.2014 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S. 8 FOR THE YEAR 2015 - 15.

EXT.P-3: COPY OF NOTICE DATED 11.2.2015 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013 - 2014.

EXT.P-4: COPY OF ORDER DATED 9.2.2015 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014 - 2015.

EXT.P-5: COPY OF REPLY DATED 7.3.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P3.

EXT.P-6: COPY OF NOTICE DATED 9.2.2015 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014 - 2015.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL --------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.8899 OF 2015 (J) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4 order passed by the respondent whereby the compounding option exercised by the petitioner for the assessment year 2014-15 has been revised by the respondent. The challenge in the writ petition against Ext.P4 is premised on the contention that, before passing Ext.P4 order, the petitioner was not put on notice, and was not afforded an opportunity of hearing.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, as also the submissions made across the bar, I find that in Ext.P4 order, there is no reference to any notice issued to the petitioner for hearing, prior to the passing of Ext.P4 order. In that view of the matter, Ext.P4 order is vitiated by a non-compliance with the rules of natural justice.

W.P.(C).No.8899/2015 Accordingly, I quash Ext.P4 and direct the respondent to consider the matter afresh, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent at 11 a.m. on 31.3.2015 for a hearing in connection with a decision to be taken by the respondent.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp