High Court Kerala High Court

M.Aboo vs State Of Kerala on 12 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
M.Aboo vs State Of Kerala on 12 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21582 of 2010(W)


1. M.ABOO, PWD CONTRACTOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1.  STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. FAST TRACK TEAM-II,

3. THE COMMERCIAL TAXE OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.SUDHAKARA MENON

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :12/07/2010

 O R D E R
                   P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
                     --------------------------------------------
                      WP(C) NO. 21582 OF 2010
                     --------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010

                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner is challenging the assessment finalized by the 2nd

respondent Fast Track Team under Section 17 D without any regard to

the statutory requirements or the law declared by this Court on the point.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to many a ground of

challenge raised in the Writ Petition, also submits that, Ext.P1 assessment

order impugned in the Writ Petition has not been signed by all the

members of the Fast Track team and as such, there is no joint application

of mind as stipulated and contemplated.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

3. Going by the materials on record, this Court finds

considerable force in the submission made from the part of the petitioner.

The course and procedure to be pursued while finalizing assessment

under Section 17D of the KGST Act have been made clear by this Court

as per the decision reported in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam and

others [2009 (4) KHC 819]. This being the position, this Court finds it

difficult to sustain Ext.P1, as the same does not stand the test of law.

4. In the said circumstances, Ext.P1 is set aside and the 2nd

2
WP(C) No. 21582/2010

respondent/such other authority as the case may be, is directed to

reconsider the matter and finalise the assessment in accordance with the

relevant provisions of law and the observations made by this Court in the

decision cited supra, which shall be finalized after hearing the petitioner, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
dnc