Aji C.K v. Commercial Tax Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2015/12TH ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 19525 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :
--------------------- AJI C.K., AGED 40 YEARS S/O. KHADER, CHITTAYAM HOSUE, PEZHAKKAPPILLY P.O. MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK.
BY ADVS.SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY SRI.R.PARAMESWARA IYER RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER OFFICE OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682736.
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX (COMMERCIAL TAX) MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI-682 002.
3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND TAXES GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn ...2/-
WP(C).No. 19525 of 2015 (M) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1:
TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF KVAT. EXHIBIT P2:
TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION FOR CENTRAL SALES TAX.
EXHIBIT P3:
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR REMITTANCE OF REGISTRATION FEE.
EXHIBIT P4:
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 8.6.2015.
EXHIBIT P5:
TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.6.2015.
EXHIBIT P6:
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.6.2015.
EXHIBIT P7:
TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.6.2015.
EXHIBIT P8:
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES. EXHIBIT P9:
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.7.2012 IN WP(C) NO.12795 OF 2011.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
-------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 19525 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner applied for new registration. As per Ext.P6 notice the petitioner has been directed to furnish Form 6 Bond for `90 lakhs with two sureties and submit ID proof with land tax receipt for the year 2015-16.
2.
The petitioner challenges the above notice.
3.
This Court in similar occasion has considered the demand of security and passed Ext.P9 judgment. 4.
I am of the view that, the registration application has to be reconsidered in the light of Ext.P9 judgment. Accordingly, Ext.P6 is set aside. There shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the registration application in the light of Ext.P9 judgment within two weeks. The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.
Pn