Kerala High Court
M/S.Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAYOF NOVEMBER 2015/4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937
WP(C).No. 35588 of 2015 (W)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
M/S.PARLE AGRO PVT. LTD., 5/188,
MEPPARAMBA, PIRAYIRI P.O., PALAKKAD,
HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT
OFF WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY,
SAHAR- CHAKALA ROAD, PARSIWADA,
ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI-400 099,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT
TAXATION KRISHNAN SHESHADRI.
BY SRI.ARSHAD HIDAYATHULLAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE.
ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN.
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT),
SPECIAL CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL TAXES,
PALAKKAD-678 002.
BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 25-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 35588 of 2015 (W)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXT.P1 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT
DATED 31/08/2015 IN WP(C).NO.26279/2015.
EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2010-11
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2010-11.
EXT.P3 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2011-12
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12.
EXT.P4 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2012-13
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13.
EXT.P5 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2013-14
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14.
EXT.P6 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2014-15
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2014-15.
EXT.P7 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2015-16
(APRIL 15) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE
MONTH OF APRIL 2015.
EXT.P8 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2015-16
(MAY15) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE
MONTH OF MAY 2015.
EXT.P9 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32090580088/2015-16
(JUNE 15) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 09/11/2015 FOR THE
MONTH OF JUNE 2015.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
rs.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No.35588 of 2015
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 25th day of November 2015
JUDGMENT
The challenge in the writ petition is against Exts.P2 to P9 assessment orders that have been passed in relation to the petitioner for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2015-16. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is essentially that, while by Ext.P1 judgment, this Court had directed the respondents to await the clarification of the authority for clarification on the issue of classification of the goods for the purposes of tax, under the KVAT Act, and to pursue further proceedings pursuant to the pre-assessment notices, only after the said order by the authority for clarification was communicated to the petitioner, the respondent has, without waiting for the order of the authority for clarification to be communicated to the petitioner, proceeded to pass Ext.P2 to P9 assessment orders, without even hearing the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner, therefore, that the impugned orders are vitiated by a non-compliance with the rules of natural justice.
2. I have heard the learned senior counsel Sri.Arshad W.P.(c).No.35588 of 2015 : 2 : Hidayathullah, duly instructed by Adv.Premjit Nagendran for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find that Exts.P2 to P9 orders passed by the respondents cannot be legally sustained. It is trite that even in a matter, where the respondents are called upon to finalise an assessment on best judgment basis, a reasonable period of at least 7 days has to be afforded to the assessee for showing cause against the proposed assessment. In the instant case, while the order said to have been passed by the authority for clarification was not communicated to the petitioner, even going by the findings in Ext.P2 to P9 orders, the said order of the authority for clarification was passed only on 06.11.2015. The impugned orders of assessment are all dated 09.11.2015, which is barely three days after the date of the clarification order. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was not heard prior to passing of the impugned orders. I, therefore see no reason to sustain Exts.P2 to P9 orders. I, therefore, quash Ext.P2 to P9 orders and direct the respondents to pass fresh orders after ensuring that the petitioner is served with a copy of the clarification oder dated 06.11.2015, and giving the petitioner a minimum period of 15 days for filing its objections against the said order, and then W.P.(c).No.35588 of 2015 : 3 : hearing the petitioner on a date, due intimation of which shall be given to the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed as above.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/