METRO POLYMERS Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the finalisation of the assessment proceedings, initiated under Section 24(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 [for brevity "KVAT Act"], evidenced by Exhibit P4.

(2.) THE admitted facts are that, a notice under Section 24(1) of the Act was issued on 07.03.2014, evidenced by Exhibit P1. The petitioner received the same on 24.03.2014 and immediately thereafter on 28.03.2014, the petitioner sought for three weeks time to file reply. It is submitted that the Assessing Officer had granted the same over telephone. The petitioner, subsequently, filed Exhibit P3 dated 19.04.2014, through e -mail, as is disclosed from Exhibit P3A. Without reference to any of the objections raised, Exhibit P4 order has been passed, which, according to the petitioner, is a gross violation of the principles of natural justice.

(3.) NECESSARILY when e -mail communications are relied on, at the first instance, there would be certain start up problems, which has to be looked at in a practical manner. However, the Assessing Officer in the present case cannot be faulted for concluding the proceedings, since the Assessing Officer did not receive the reply and the assessee also did not turn up for availing an opportunity for hearing. But, looking at the practical aspects, it is only proper that Exhibit P4 is set aside only for the reason that the petitioner's objections were not considered at all; for whatever reasons, even if the Assessing Officer cannot be faulted.