IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 21245 of 2010(E)
1. A.M.ABDUL HAMEED,M/S.ARAFA TRADERS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL
... Respondent
2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB)-II,DEPARTMENT
3. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
4. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
5. TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY),
For Petitioner :SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :14/07/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P. (C) No. 21245 of 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 14th day of July, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of Ext.P5 order passed by
the first respondent, whereby the sanction given to have the liability
settled as per Ext.P4 order, availing the benefit of ‘Amnesty Scheme’,
has been been revoked, allegedly based on Ext.P6 Circular.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that,
Ext.P1 to P1(c) orders, imposing penalty upon the petitioner, have been
sought to be settled, though the assessment in respect of the
concerned assessment years is still to be finalized. This, however
does not bar the way of the petitioner in causing the matter to be settled
in respect of the ‘penalty’, availing the benefit of ‘Amnesty Scheme’.
This being the position, the stand taken by the respondent cancelling
the Ext. P4 relief granted, by issuing Ext.P5 order, is not correct or
sustainable and is liable to be intercepted by this Court.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits
that the assessment in respect of the concerned assessment orders will
be finalized within the shortest possible time, simultaneously adding
that the benefit of the ‘Amnesty Scheme’ now has been extended till
30.9.2010, by virtue of the Circular bearing No 13/2010 dated
30.6.2010.
W.P. (C) No. 21245 of 2010
: 2 :
4. In the above circumstances, the first respondent is directed to
finalize the assessment in respect of the different assessment years
within ‘one month’ from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It
will be open for the petitioner to prefer necessary application to have
the entire liability in respect of the ‘assessment’ as well as the ‘penalty’
to be cleared availing the Scheme (which is stated as extended till
30.9.2010). The liability to satisfy the due amount will depend upon the
outcome of the final orders and also the sanction to be given for
availing the benefit of the ‘Amnesty Scheme’. It is made clear that, the
coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner
shall be kept in abeyance till the proceedings are finalized as above.
The Writ Petition is disposed as above.
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
kmd