K.Basheer vs The Intelligence Officer(Ib) - I
2021 Latest Caselaw 581 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

    THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.21243 OF 2020(E)


PETITIONER:

               K.BASHEER
               AGED 28 YEARS
               BAITHUL-AMAN, OTHAYOTH, PURYIL, PADANILAM P.O.,
               KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE (EX. PROPRIETOR OF FASHION
               JEWELLERY).

               BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB) - I
               OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, (INT),
               COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001.

      2        THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, (APPEALS),
               DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001.

      3        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
               CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673020.




               SMT. THUSHARA JAMES - GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.21243 OF 2020                  2

                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent 'to

issue/serve the copy of the proceedings/order

rendered by the said Authority on Ext.P2 Appeal

preferred by him'.

2. However, when this matter was called

today, Smt.Thushara James, learned Government

Pleader, submitted that, in fact, the Appeal of

the petitioner had been initially dismissed and

that he had applied for restoration of the same

through Ext.P8 application. She submitted that

this application was allowed and the Appeal was

consequently restored to file; but subsequently,

dismissed on merits. She added that since the

petitioner has suppressed all these facts from

this Court, this writ petition may be dismissed.

3. In response, Shri.O.D.Sivadas, learned

counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the

afore submissions of the learned Government

Pleader are not accurate since his client was not

aware that the Appeal had been dismissed

initially and that it is, therefore, that he had

preferred Ext.P8 application for restoration. He

further conceded that if the said application has

been allowed and the Appeal has been subsequently

disposed of on its merits, his client will

certainly have to challenge the same in terms of

law. He, therefore, prayed that this writ

petition be closed reserving such liberty to him.

In the afore circumstances, recording the

submissions of Smt.Thushara James as afore, I

order this writ petition and direct the Appellate

Authority to furnish a copy of the order to the

petitioner within a period of one week from today

and the coercive action, based on the demand,

will stand deferred for a period of two weeks

from today, so as to enable the petitioner to

invoke his appellate remedy.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

MC/7.1.2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 25.08.2011 NO.IBI-53/09-10/B ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 12.03.2012 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 12.03.2012 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF DELAY PETITION DATED 12.03.2012 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 10.04.2012 IN W.A.NO.669/2012.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 05.08.2013 IN WP(c)NO.19440 OF 2013.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED 03.03.2020 NO.C2-12232/18 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED DATED 10.11.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL


MC

                     (TRUE COPY)                PA TO JUDGE