IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 36 of 2009()
1. HOTEL THUSHARA INTERNATIONAL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WC & CT),
... Respondent
2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB) - 1,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.RAMADAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice MR.J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :06/01/2009
O R D E R
J.B. KOSHY, Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE &
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
........................................................................
W.A. Nos. 36, 38 & 39 OF 2009
.........................................................................
Dated this the 6th January, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Koshy, Ag. CJ.
These appeals are filed against the common judgment
passed by the learned single Judge. Certain records were seized
from the petitioner’s establishment. After perusing them,
notices were issued proposing levy of penalty. The said notices
were dated 05.11.2008. The penalty orders were dated
29.11.2008.
2. It is contended that on the request of the petitioner for
furnishing of copies of documents seized from their
establishment, they were given only copies which were not
legible. For filing objections to Ext.P1 notice, the petitioner
submitted Ext. P2 representation for return of original
documents since the photo copies given to the petitioner were
not legible. The matter was adjourned to 29.11.2008. The
W.A. Nos. 36, 38 & 39 OF 2009
2
petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 26.11.2008 for
further time as the original documents were returned only on
24.11.2008. According to the petitioner, though he was
informed that he will be intimated the next date of hearing, no
opportunity was granted to him. Instead, he was issued with
demand notices for a sum of Rs. 27 lakhs in all, it is contended.
3. According to the Government/Revenue, after verifying
the documents seized, photo copies of the same were given to
the petitioner. According to the learned Government Pleader, no
assurance was given that the date of hearing will be intimated to
the petitioner after adjourning the matter on the request of the
petitioner. These are the questions of dispute. Whether photo
copies handed over to the petitioner were legible or not is a
matter to be ascertained by the authorities concerned. The
learned single judge rejected the Writ Petition on the ground that
that the petitioner is available with alternate and efficacious
remedy of filing statutory appeal. It was also observed that
violation of natural justice can also be pleaded before the
appellate authority. In view of the fact that the petitioner is
W.A. Nos. 36, 38 & 39 OF 2009
3
available with an efficacious and alternate remedy, this court is
not expected to entertain this appeal. However, on the facts of
the case, the petitioner is allowed to file the statutory appeal
within two weeks from today. If the appeal is filed within two
weeks from today, the appeal shall be disposed of by the
appellate authority within one month from thereafter. Till then,
the demand notices shall be kept in abeyance.
The Writ Appeals are disposed of as above.
J.B. KOSHY,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
lk
