V. Selma vs. The State Tax Officer

Held

The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. The reasoning was based on the submission by the Government Pleader that a fresh assessment order had been issued to the petitioner during the pendency of the writ petition. The Court noted that the petitioner possessed a statutory remedy of appeal against this new assessment order. Consequently, the Court found no further matter to be considered in the writ petition and dismissed it as infructuous. No specific amount in dispute or procedural history beyond the issuance of the fresh order was detailed.

Facts

The petitioner, V. Selma, proprietress of M/s. Grand Agencies, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner's grievance stemmed from an order (Ext.P1) passed by the Appellate authority, which remitted the matter back to the assessing authority for reconsideration for the assessment year 2011-2012. The petitioner highlighted her predicament concerning an alleged demand. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was served with a fresh assessment order. The Government Pleader submitted that a remedy of appeal was available against this new order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is infructuous in light of the fresh assessment order and the availability of an appellate remedy? The petitioner argued that the original assessment order led to the appellate authority remitting the matter, and her predicament persisted. The revenue, through the Government Pleader, contended that a fresh assessment order had been issued during the pendency of the writ petition, and the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal against this new order. Therefore, the revenue argued that the writ petition had become infructuous.