ARDRA ASSOCIATES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved with the non consideration of Ext.P4 rectification application filed under Section 66 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('Act' for short). The petitioner has also filed an appeal from the assessment order, as is seen from Ext.P5 memorandum. The petitioner is a works contractor who opted for compounding and filed returns for the Assessment Year 2013-2014, based on which a notice was issued under Section 25(1) of the Act. An Order was also passed at Ext.P3. The petitioner is said to have filed Ext.P4 rectification application on 13.12.2016. An appeal too was filed on 31.12.2016, as is seen from Ext.P5.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that a reading of Exts.P3 and P4 would indicate that the petitioner was not heard properly and that on 19.08.2016, when the petitioner had appeared, the Assessing Authority was on leave. The Assessing Officer has made the assessment on best judgment, after scrutiny of the returns and Form No.49, for reason of the petitioner having not produced any documents or registered sale deeds, in order to prove the contentions raised in the objections. It was also noticed that the assessee has not produced any proof regarding refund of money.

(3.) It is submitted that the proof is now produced as per Ext.P4. Essentially, what the petitioner seeks is a rehearing of the matter. A reading of Ext.P3 would indicate that the petitioner was granted ample opportunity to file objections and produce the documents in support of such objections. The petitioner, as is seen from Ext.P3, has also filed reply dated 19.08.2016 and 06.09.2016. The contention that by the rectification application the petitioner has produced the supporting documents; practically leads to an admission that there were no substantiating documents produced along with the objections.