By Advs. Sri.harisankar v. Menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21269 of 2010(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- A.M.ABDUL HAMEED, M/S. ARAFA TRADERS, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON, SRI.MAHESH V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & SALES TAX OFFICER, VAT CIRCLE, SULTHAN BATHERY. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.21269 OF 2010............................................ DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2010 JUDGMENT According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 series orders have been passed by the second respondent without any regard to the mandategiven by the third respondent vide Ext.P1 and in such circumstances,they have been subjected to challenge by filing Ext.P3 series appeals,along with Ext.P4 series applications for condonation of delay in filingthe appeals, which are pending consideration before the thirdrespondent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is very much aggrieved of the course and conduct of therespondents; particularly since the sanction giving the benefit of theAmnesty Scheme is stated as withdrawn, raising a technical objectionthat the assessment proceedings have not become final. It is in suchcircumstances that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 seriesapplications for early hearing of the appeals and is constrained to filethis writ petition before this Court for appropriate reliefs. Wpc 21269/2010 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Taking note of the particularl facts and circumstances, thisCourt finds it fit and proper to direct the appellate authority to considerand finalise the appeals; lest the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme shouldbe denied to the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the thirdrespondent is directed to consider and pass final orders on Ext.P3 seriesappeals and Ext.P4 series petitions to condone the delay in filing thesame, which shall be done in accordance with law, as expeditiously aspossible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE lgk