9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 950X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, Special Government Pleader, ANTONY DOMINIC J.-The petitioner challenges exhibits P4, P4(a) and P4(b) penalty orders issued by the sixth respondent exercising his powers under section 67 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. 2. The petitioner is a dealer under the Act engaged in rearing of chicken and other related activities. Penalty proceedings were initiated and by exhibit P1, fourth re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Accordingly the documents were given and the proceedings continued. In the course of the proceedings the petitioner again approached this court by filing W.P. (C). No. 21795 of 2012. That writ petition was considered and was disposed of by exhibit P3 judgment. In that writ petition, complaint of the petitioner was that he was not permitted to cross-examine seven witnesses. Since adjudication pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the clear mala fide intention of prolonging the matter indefinitely. Seven clear months have been elapsed since the penalty notices have been served upon the dealer. The additional witnesses list Sl. Nos. 1 to 8 now being requested could have been given much earlier if the petitioner is true to his request." 6. Accordingly, the sixth respondent passed exhibit P4 series of orders levying penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r's request for crossexamining the additional witnesses was declined. In so far as this plea of the petitioner is concerned, a reading of the Intelligence Officer's order shows that on facts he was satisfied that the request belatedly made by the petitioner was intended only for prolonging the proceedings. As far as the first contention is concerned, it should be stated that on both the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
