K.K. PURUSHOTHAMAN Vs. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 12.4.2018, which dismissed the writ petition filed against Exts.P9 and P10 orders passed against the writ petitioner under Section 60 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. It is seen that Exts. P9 and P10 are orders passed by the first appellate authority under the K.G.S.T. Act for the assessment years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 respectively. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the appellate authority did not consider any of the grounds raised by the appellant in the appeal before the appellate authority, and that the appellate order was laconic and bereft of any reasoning. The learned single Judge found that Exts.P9 and P10 orders are appealable orders under the K.G.S.T. Act and hence refused to entertain the writ petition and dismissed the same on the ground that there is alternative remedy available to the petitioner.

(2.) We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

(3.) On a consideration of the facts and circumstances, we find that it has all along been the contention of the appellant that the first appellate orders, that are impugned in the writ petition, do not contain the reasons that weighed with the first appellate authority while dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant. We are of the view that an order passed without reasons cannot be said to be a valid order, more so when, in the appeal preferred before the first appellate authority, the assessee had raised specific contentions and the order of the appellate authority does not advert to any of the said contentions.