IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 29203 of 2007(B)
1. M/S.SHARON CHEMICALS & SOLVENTS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BOBBY JOHN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :03/10/2007
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).NO.29203 OF 2007-B
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day October, 2007.
JUDGMENT
The challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P10 and P11.
Both these orders of assessments are in relation to the assessment
year 2001-02. Ext.P10 relates to tax under the KGST Act and
Ext.P11 relates to tax under the CST Act. In relation to Ext.P10,
contention raised is that, denying an adjournment requested by the
petitioner, assessment has been completed. In support of that, the
petitioner relied on Exts.P9 and P10 application for adjournment
and medical certificate respectively. It is seen from Ext.P10
order itself that request of the petitioner for adjournment was
considered and he was given six weeks’ time to file reply. Even
thereafter since they did not file the reply, the assessment was
completed. Therefore, there is no question of violation of principles
of natural justice in so far as Ext.P10 is concerned. Hence,
challenge as against Ext.P10 will stand repelled.
2. In so far as Ext.P11 is concerned, it is seen that in the notice
issued, the balance CST due was indicated to be Rs.63,764/=. As
WPC.NO.29203/07 .
2
against this, the tax assessed under the CST Act is Rs.3,82,536/= .
Therefore, the petitioner did not have an opportunity to offer a
proper explanation regarding the tax amount, that is found to be
due. To that extent, there is denial of reasonable opportunity and
violation of the principles of natural justice. This position supported
by the decision reported in Engine Valves Limited v. Union of
India (Mad) (1990 STC 84).
3. Therefore, Ext.P11 will stand quashed for violation of
principles of natural justice with liberty to the respondent to initiate
fresh proceedings by issuing proper notice to the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.
cl
WPC.NO.29203/07 .
3