IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 4830 of 2008(Y)
1. ABDUL GAFOOR.K.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES,
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
For Petitioner :SRI.A.K.ABDUL AZEEZ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :26/02/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
===============
W.P.(C) NO. 4830 OF 2008 Y
====================
Dated this the 26th day of February, 2008
J U D G M E N T
In this writ petition, the prayer sought for is to quash Ext.P3
and direct the respondents to accept and consider Ext.P4
application for renewal of registration under the KVAT Act.
2. Learned Government pleader on instructions submit
that since April,2006, the petitioner has not filed any return. It is
also stated that renewal application ought to have been made
before 01/04/2006 and that also was not made and that the
renewal feel also has not been paid. It is stated that several
notices were issued to the petitioner, but the petitioner did not
respond to any one of this. According to the learned Government
pleader, it was in these circumstances that Ext.P3
communication cancelling the registration was issued to the
petitioner. It is pointed out that it is still later that the petitioner
submitted Ext.P4 and in the aforesaid circumstances the request
WPC 4830/08
:2 :
in Ext.P4 could not be considered.
As stated by the learned Government Pleader, since there
was default in filing the returns by the petitioner and in applying
for renewal, respondents cannot be faulted for the steps they
have taken. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved, the remedy
available to the petitioner is to challenge Ext.P3 before the
appropriate authority in terms of the statue. With that liberty and
leaving open the contentions, writ petition is disposed of.
ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE.
Rp