This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging pre- assessment notices issued to him under Section 19(C) of the KGST Act. The contention of the petitioner in the writ petition is that the notices issued to him are barred by limitation. When the matter was taken up today, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that in view of the fact that there was no stay granted against the said notices, the assessing authority proceeded with the protective assessments under Section 19(C) and completed the assessments by invoking the fast track procedure under 17(D) of the KGST Act. In view of the fact that assessment orders have since been passed he would submit that the present writ petition has become infructuous. He would only pray that the dismissal of this writ petition may not prejudice his contention in the writ petitions that he has already preferred (W.P.(C).Nos.10596, 10814 and 22975 of 2014) challenging the assessment orders.
I have heard the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar and particularly taking note of the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, W.P.(C).No.32303 of 2010 -2-
that subsequent to the notices that were impugned in the writ petition the assessment orders have also been passed, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous, without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner in the writ petitions filed challenging the assessment orders.
mns A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE