O.C.KUNHIMOHAMMED Vs. DISTRICT ASSESSMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the demand made as per Exhibit P1 for satisfaction of the amounts allegedly assessed under the Kerala Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996 [for brevity "Cess Act"]. The petitioner admittedly owns a building within the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent, who is the Assessing Officer under the Cess Act. The petitioner's contention is that the said building had been completed before the coming into force of the Cess Act and that the notices issued and assessments completed are not with respect to the building of the petitioner.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner specifically points to Exhibit P2 notice issued, which makes a demand of Rs.29,726/ -, assessing the total construction value at Rs.29,72,552/ -. However, Exhibit P6 order, sought to be served on the petitioner, has assessed the value of construction at Rs.46,86,616/ - and demanded an amount of Rs.46,866/ - as the cess due. It is also pertinent that though the notice was issued with reference to file No.B2.4270/09, the assessment has been completed with reference to B2.4587/09. The contention of the petitioner, hence, is that the assessment now completed and the notice issued are with respect to other buildings, which are not owned by the petitioner.

(3.) IT is pertinent that even the documents produced by the Government brings forth a serious anomaly. The assessment, even according to the Government, is completed by Exhibit R1(f), which is Exhibit P6 produced by the petitioner herein. That bears the number as also assesses the value and cess as indicated herein above. The notice relied on by the respondent is produced as Exhibit R1(b) and the same has yet another reference No.B2.4787/09 with date 16.03.2010. The notice referred in Exhibit R1(f) is not R1(b). Evidently there is an anomaly in the assessment completed under the Act.