Wp(C)/7047/2015 Of Issac Andrews v. The Agricultural Income Tax & Commercial Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/19TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 7047 of 2015 (E) --------------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------ ISSAC ANDREWS, AGED 43 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, "JACKIES", ERESSERIL HOUSE, DUTCH SQUARE, NEW BAZAR P.O., ALAPPUZHA - 688 012. BY ADVS.SRI.V.DEVANANDA NARASIMHAM SRI.P.H.RIYAS RESPONDENTS:-: ----------------------- 1. THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA - 688 011. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 001. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: bp WP(C).No. 7047 of 2015 (E) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ANNUAL RETURN DATED 10.07.12 E-FILED FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT. THE YEAR 2011-12 BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE RR NOTICES DATED 28.01.2015 ISSUED U/S. 7 AND 34 OF THE RR ACT BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. AND 34 OF THE RR ACT BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF CERTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 11.07.14 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT ON 28.02.2015 FOR THE YEAR 2011-2012. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS--------------------------------------- : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 7047 of 2015 =====================================================Dated this the 10[th] day of March, 2015 JUDGMENT The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P3assessment order passed in relation to the petitioner for theassessment year 2011-12 under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act.The challenge against Ext.P3 is that, the said order was passedwithout hearing the petitioner and therefore, there was noncompliance with the rules of natural justice. 2.I have heard Sri.Devananda Narasimham, the learnedcounsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also Smt. SobhaAnnamma Eappen, the learned Government Pleader appearing forthe respondents. 3.On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase and the submissions made across the bar, I find that in Ext.P3order, a reference is made to the service of notice on the petitioner.It is then stated that, the notice, although sent by registered post,was returned by the postal authority as 'unclaimed'. W.P.(C). No. 7047 of 2015 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner points out thatthe petitioner had closed his business, at the address that wasreferred to in Ext.P3 order, and had also intimated this fact to therespondents. It is also pointed out that, in the annual return filedby the petitioner, the address of the petitioner is correctly shown. 5.In that view of the matter, I find that the respondentscould have served the notice on the petitioner, at the address fromwhere he is presently functioning. Inasmuch as that has not beendone prior to the passing of Ext.P3 order, I quash Ext.P3 order anddirect the 1[st] respondent to complete the assessment of thepetitioner for the assessment year 2011-12 afresh, after hearingthe petitioner. To enable the 1[st] respondent to do this, I direct thepetitioner to appear before the 1[st] respondent at his office at 11AM on 25.03.2015. The writ petition is disposed as above. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das