Wa/1127/2011 Of M/S.tmt Granites (P) Ltd v. The Agricultural Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 WA.No. 1127 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19817/2011 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------ M/S.TMT GRANITES (P) LTD., IX/302, MANGALAM DAM (PO), PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TOM GEORGE. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ALATHUR-678 541. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. NO. 1127 OF 2011 = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. Writ appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judgerelegating the appellant for appellate remedy. We have heard counsel forthe appellant and the Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. After hearing both sides and on considering Ext.P2, what wenotice is the assessing officer was considering an important question as tothe items which could be included in the certificate of registration issuedunder the CST Act , which are items for resale, for use in themanufacturing or processing of goods for sale. The officer shouldcertainly consider the exact nature of activities of the appellant andconsider entitlement for the inter-state purchase of items at concessional rateauthorised under Rule 13 of the CST (R & T) rules. In fact, the officer isfree to conduct inspection to verify for himself the nature of activities, therequirements of items for setting up of the plant, construction and other W.A. 1127/2011 purposes, machineries required etc. and the assessee should be heard beforepassing final orders. If a request for inclusion of any item is not allowed, itis the duty of the officer to inform the appellant the reason why it cannot beallowed and only after giving an opportunity to the appellant to explain hisclaim, the officer should reject it. The assessing officer did not consider thematter in detail. We notice that the assessing officer has passed the orderwithout a proper enquiry or hearing. Consequently we allow the writappeal vacating impugned judgment and allow the writ petition by vacatingExt.P2, with direction to the assessing officer to pass fresh orders on theappellant's application by following the procedures as stated above, withina period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,(JUDGE). knc/- P.S. GOPINATHAN,(JUDGE)