ELDHOSE KURIAKKOSE Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges exhibit P1 assessment order and exhibit P2 demand notice. By exhibit P1, the petitioner is assessed purportedly by the fast track team under Section 17D of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Exhibit P2 is the demand notice.

(2.) I heard Dr. K.B. Mohammed Kutty, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. The main contention is based on exhibit P4 judgment of the Division Bench of this Court as per which pre-assessment notice is to be given. In the counter-affidavit, it is not disputed that pre-assessment notice was not issued and also it is stated that since the assessment was completed by the fast track team, the rate of tax is 5.6 per cent which was correctly applied and it was brought to the notice of the authorised representative and the assessment was completed without issuing pre-assessment notice. A reply affidavit is filed, wherein, it is stated, inter alia, as follows:

(3.) In the light of the pleadings, I would think that having regard to the judgment of this Court and also the dictate of the circular, the petitioner should have been issued a pre-assessment notice. It is to be noticed that in Circular No. 17 of 2007, Clause 20 reads as follows: