Kerala High Court
Shajir Arafath vs The Fast Trrack Team on 10 February, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013/15TH BHADRA, 1935
WP(C).No. 21784 of 2013 ()
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
SHAJIR ARAFATH
PROPRIETOR, 'COMPUSAT' KARAT HOUSE, KOZHIKODE.
BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
--------------
1. THE FAST TRRACK TEAM
COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, OFFICE-CIRCLE-1
KOZHIKODE - 673 001.
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICER,
CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE - 673 001.
SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06-09-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RKC
WP(C).No. 21784 of 2013 ()
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXT.P-1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.2.2009
EXT.P-2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.10.2010
EXT.P-3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED 11.10.2012
EXT.P-4: TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF
THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER AND SON.
EXT.P-5: TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORTS ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONER EVIDENCING THE FACTUM OF CONTINUOUS TREATMENT.
EXT.P-6: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE DIVISION BENCH
(REPORTED IN 2008(2) KHC 44 IN VIANI PAPERS V. FAST TRACK
TEAM AND ANOTHER)IN W.A.371/08 DATED 14.2.2008
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :NIL
RKC
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE.
V.CHITAMBARESH,J.
= = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C) No. 21784 of 2013
= = = = = = = = = = = == = = = =
Dated this the 6th day of September, 2013
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner contends that Ext.P1 pre assessment notice was issued by the second respondent and not by the first respondent Fast Track Team as was warranted. The invalidity of Ext.P1 notice is set up based on Ext.P6 judgment of this Court in Viani Papers vs. Fast Track Team and another. The petitioner did not respond to Ext.P1 notice and therefore Ext.P2 order of best judgment assessment followed.
2. The appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected by Ext.P3 order for non production of proof of payment of tax. The petitioner contends that his mother and son were sick and Exts.P4 and P5 medical reports are relied on for this purpose. The petitioner seeks an opportunity to place his case before the Fast Track Team for an order of assessment on merits.
3. The Government Pleader points out that the invalidity of Ext.P1 notice has not been taken as a ground by the petitioner in the appeal filed against Ext.P2 order of assessment. It is also pointed out that several months have elapsed since the passing W.P.(C) No. 21784 of 2013 2 of Ext.P3 order by the Tribunal and that the writ petition is belated.
4. It cannot be disputed that Ext.P1 notice is invalid going by Ext.P6 judgment and the entire proceedings that followed are bad in law. The petitioner cannot also be found fault with for not responding to Ext.P1 notice when the same is otherwise vitiated. I do feel that an opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to place his case before the Fast Track Team of course subject to stringent conditions.
3. I set aside Ext.P1 notice, Exts.P2 and P3 orders and remit the matter to the first respondent Fast Track Team for denovo consideration. This is however subject to the condition that the petitioner remits a sum of Rs.2 lakhs towards the demand (for the assessment year 2004-05) within a period of six weeks. The petitioner shall appear before the second respondent who is a member of first respondent Team at 11.a.m on 1-11-2013. Fresh orders shall be passed on or before 30-11- 2013 after hearing the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of.
V.CHITAMBARESH
smm JUDGE
W.P.(C) No. 21784 of 2013 3