Pallythazham Amoo vs. Assistant Commissioner ( Intelligence ) - Kerala High Court, 12 August 2021

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 16605 OF 2021 PETITIONER: PALLYTHAZHAM AMOO, AGED 71 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, A.R. TRAVELS, MEESHAKKARAN BUILDINGS, MM ALI ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673 004. BY ADVS. SRI. R.JAIKRISHNA SRI. C.S.ARUN SHANKAR SMT. NARAYANI HARIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), PRESENTLY DESIGNATED AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), MOBILE SQUAD (SQUAD NO V), OFFICE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARMTENT, NIRMAL ACRCADE BUILDINGS, ERNAHIPALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE 673 006. 2 STATE TAX OFFICER (INTELLIGENCE), MOBILE SQUAD III, IN-CHARGE OF SQUAD V., OFFICE OF THE STATE TAX OFFICER (INTELLIGENCE), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, NIRMAL ARCADE BUILDING, ERNAHIPALAM P.O. KOZHIKODE-673 006. BY ADV. SMT. THUSHARA JAMES - SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.16605 of 2021 (A) 2 Devan Ramachandran, J. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16605 of 2021 (A) ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2021

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court impugning Ext.P4 order of the 2nd respondent on various grounds, but primarily on the ground that it has been issued without affording him an opportunity of being heard.

The learned Senior Government Pleader Smt.Thushara James, however, pointed out to the last page of the impugned order which records that a show cause notice had been issued, to the petitioner, giving him an opportunity of being heard, but that he refused to be personally present or to make other alternative arrangements. The learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that, therefore, the 2nd respondent had no other option but to issue Ext.P4, in the manner as it is presently framed. She, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

Even when I hear the learned Senior Government Pleader as afore; and notice that a show cause notice is reported to have been issued to the petitioner, as is recorded in Ext.P4, the conceded fact is that he was not heard by the Authority, while the said order had been issued.

I am, therefore, of the view that petitioner must be given a limited latitude of being heard before an assessment is made against him, since this is a part of the basic tenet of the statutory scheme as also the principles of natural justice.

In the above circumstances, I set aside Ext.P4, so as to pave way for a re-consideration by the 2nd respondent, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. In order to obtain an expeditious compliance of the above directions, I direct the petitioner to mark appearance before the 2nd respondent at 11:00 a.m on 07.09.2021; on which day, the 2nd respondent will hear the petitioner or fix another suitable date for hearing and then complete the assessment as per law. This writ petition is, accordingly disposed of. Devan Ramachandran, Judge ww APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 4.5.2021. EXHIBIT P2OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DTD. 16.7.2021. EXHIBIT P3OF THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RE PODENT DTD. 23.7.2021. EXHIBIT P4OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 29.07.2021.