TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of a few health issues was unable to move out of the house or appear before the first respondent on the dates when enquiry was held - HELD THAT:- This Court, prima facie, is of the view that the case in hand is not a case of complete denial of opportunity to petitioner or following the requirements of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003; but a case of examining whether the opportunity affo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI. E. P. GOVINDAN AND SRI. K. G. SOMANATH For The Respondents : SR. G. P. SRI. C. K. GOVINDAN JUDGMENT Heard Sri. E.P. Govindan, the petitioner's counsel and Sri. C.K. Govindan, the learned senior Government Pleader. 2. The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 assessment order dated 12.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he outcome of re-assessment. He prays for remanding the matter for fresh disposal. 4. The learned senior Government Pleader submits that the petitioner can file appeal, challenging Ext.P1 order and the Appellate Authority is equally empowered to look into the alleged illegality in the assessment; and can also afford opportunity to the petitioner, while disposing of the appeal. He a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent. Without much deliberation by taking note of contents in Ext.P4 and also the bona fide offer of petitioner to deposit substantial a sum of ₹ 2,00,000/- even before the assessment order is passed would go to show that the petitioner was in fact prevented from availing the opportunity given to the first respondent beyond the circumstances under his control. Therefore, Ext.P1 asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
