9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MENT The petitioner is challenging Ext.P10 assessment order passed by the first respondent in respect of the assessment year 2004-05 under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the above assessment order has been passed, without serving the preassessment notice, for the reason that the notice referred to in Ext.P10 stated as sent by registered post on 26- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Ext.P5, stating that the petitioner could not act on time and thus seeking for one more chance, pursuant to which Ext.P6 notice was issued granting such opportunity. But then, the petitioner preferred Ext.P7 request for adjournment on 16-5-2006, and yielding to the said request, Ext.P8 fresh notice was issued by the first respondent on 18-1-2007. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's industry was closed down as early as on 15-10-2002 and that the said fact is well known to the first respondent as well, who ought to have sent the 're assessment notice' dated 22-6-2007 referred to in Ext.P10, in the residential address of the petitioner. Even though the petitioner has stated that such indu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice for adjournment, (who was then served with Ext.P8 notice and thereafter sought for further adjournment as per Ext.P9), ought to have been vigilant enough to ascertain the actual particulars especially with regard to the next date of hearing scheduled by the first respondent. 6. The petitioner having not pursued any such exercise, taking the minimum effort to see that the proceedings were tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
