Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

N.H.SARMA, MANAGING PARTNER versus THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


N.H.SARMA, MANAGING PARTNER v. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - WA No. 1187 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 8906 (29 May 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 1187 of 2007()

1. N.H.SARMA, MANAGING PARTNER,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R.),

3. THE ADDITIOANL SALES TAX OFFICER,

4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.

5. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,

For Petitioner :SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :29/05/2007

O R D E R

H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.

W.A.No.1187 of 2007

Dated this the 29th day of May, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L. DATTU, C.J. Revenue recovery proceedings had been initiated against the appellant/petitioner pursuant to an order of assessment passed by the Assessing Authority for the assessment year 1997-98. Aggrieved by this revenue recovery proceedings, the appellant/petitioner was before this court on the ground that the assessing authority, without complying with the orders and directions issued by the first appellate authority, has issued the impugned recovery notice.

2. The learned Government Pleader had made a submission before the learned single judge to the effect that, pursuant to the orders and directions issued by the first appellate authority, the Assessing Authority has passed a revised order and thereafter had issued a demand notice inter alia directing the appellant/petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.77,150/- towards the Sales Tax due.

3. Taking into consideration the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, a learned single Judge of this court has disposed of W.P.(C)No.7849/07.

4. Aggrieved by the said order of the learned single Judge, the petitioner is before us in this appeal. W.A.No.1187 of 2007

5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the respondent-Assessing Authority has not passed a revised order. Assuming that it is passed, according to the learned counsel, the same is not served on the appellant and therefore, the order passed by the learned single Judge requires reconsideration.

6. Per contra, Sri.V.V.Asokan, Special Government Pleader for Taxes, submits that pursuant to the order of the first appellate authority, the Assessing Authority has passed a revised order for the assessment year 1997-98 and has issued a fresh demand notice on 14.2.2007.

7. We do not doubt the correctness of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader. However, in the interest of the assessee, we direct the Assessing Authority to serve a revised assessment order for the assessment year 1997-98 and also a demand notice, within 15 days from today. With these observations and direction, the writ appeal is disposed of. Sd/- H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE. Sd/- K.T. SANKARAN,

JUDGE.

Sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.