Disposed

T.Rajan v. the Intelligence Inspector

Kerala HC19 Dec 2014WP(C)/27722/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ to appoint independent authority for measuring granite slabs and adjudication. Court noted interim commissioner reported defects but goods were already cleared after security deposit payment. Court directed authority to finalize proceedings and disposed petition.

What did the court decide?

Authority directed to finalize adjudication proceedings under Section 47(6) KVAT Act after hearing petitioner; petition disposed.

T.Rajan Vs the Intelligence Inspector — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 27722 of 2014 (M)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

T.RAJAN PROPRIETOR, EVERBRIGHT MARBLE PRODUCTS, 2/2366 NEAR GANDHI ASHRAMAM, P.O.CIVIL STATION, CALICUT - 20.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.FIROZ

¶9

SMT.M.SHAJNA SRI.S.KANNAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, WAYANAD KALPETTA - 673 121.

¶12

2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, WAYANAD KALPETTA - 673 121.

¶13

3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, WAYANAD KALPETTA - 673 121.

¶14

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, WAYANAD KALPETTA - 673 121.

¶15

5. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIALTAXES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES PUBLIC OFFICEBUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶16

6. REGIONAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE NIRMITHI KENDRA (KESNIK) REGIONAL NIRMITHI KENDRA ARATTUTHARA P.O., WAYANAD - 670 645.

¶17

R1-R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN R. BY ADV. SRI.RAAJESH S.SUBRAHMANIAM-ADV.COMMISSIONER

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ps/31/12/14

¶19

WP(C).No. 27722 of 2014 (M)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶22

EXT.P-1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.OR 281/VC II /14 - 15 DTD 5.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT

¶23

EXT.P-2: A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.OR 281/VC II /14 - 15 DTD 5.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT AFTER FILLING THE BLANKS BY THE IST RESPONDENT

¶24

EXT.P-3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DTD 16.10.2014 IN WPC NO.26547 OF 2014 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶25

EXT.P-4: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.18/2012 DTD 23.6.2012 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶27

ANNEXURE-R2(A): COPY OF THE MAHAZAR ALONG WITH THE MEASUREMENT SLIP IN 4 PAGES.

¶28

ANNEXURE-R2(B): COPY OF THE REVISED NOTICE DT. 25.10.2014.

¶29

ANNEXURE-A1: SOME OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ACTUAL POSITION OF THE GRANITE SLABS. ANNEXURE-A2: MEASUREMENT AND FINAL CALCULATION OF THE ENTIRE 165 SLABS. ANNEXURE-A3: PICTORIAL REPRESENTATION OF THE TWO WAYS OF MEASUREMENT AS PER CLAUSE 2 OF EXT.P4.

¶30

//TRUE COPY//

¶31

PA TO JUDGE

¶32

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶33

W.P.(C)No.27722 OF 2014

¶34

Dated this the 19^th December, 2014

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶37

prayers:

¶38

“i) to call for the records leading to Exhibit P1, P2 and P4 and to direct the 6^th respondent or an Advocate Commissioner to be appointed by this Hon'ble Court or to appoint any other appropriate independent authority or person to measure and prepare a mahazar of the measurement and defects of the granite slabs mentioning the defects regarding the 90 degree uneven edges and shapes of slabs and holes, cracks, patches, uneven shapes etc of the slabs detained as per Ext.P2 notice in accordance with Exhibit P4 Circular and to report such other matters as requested by the petitioner at the time of inspection and ot place them for adjudication before the adjudicating authority pursuant to Ext.P2 notice by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order.

¶39

ii) to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to modify Exhibit P2 notice based on measurement by independent body by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order.

¶40

iii) to grant cost to the petitioner from Respondents 1 and 2.

¶41

¶42

W.P.(C)No.27722 OF 2014

¶43

iv) to pass such other order or direction as this Hon'ble may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶44

An interim order was passed by this Court in I.A. 14741

¶45

of 2014, whereby an Advocate Commissioner came to be appointed to conduct a spot inspection and to effect measurement of Granite slabs. After conducting the measurement, the Advocate Commissioner has filed a report, producing copies of the relevant materials as Annexures A1 to A3. The Advocate Commissioner's report is placed on record. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that pursuant to issuance of revised notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, the security deposit has already been satisfied by the petitioner and the goods have been got cleared. In the said circumstance, it is for the adjudicating authority to finalise the adjudication proceedings, passing appropriate orders under Section 47(6) of the KVAT Act after hearing the petitioner, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

¶46

The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶47

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶48

T.Rajan v. the Intelligence Inspector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Rajan v. the Intelligence Inspector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Varkey Retail Ventures (P) Ltd. Vs South Indian Bank

Asokan Vs the Kollam Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

M.J.George Vs Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)

T.Rajan Vs Suman, Intelligence Inspector

T.P.Abdurahiman Vs P.M.Kunjappan

Limi Leni Vs State Bank of India