Against Ext.P3 assessment order under KVAT Act for the assessment year 2011-12 the petitioner has preferred appeal and stay petition before the third respondent. When revenue recovery proceedings were initiated he approached this Court through a writ petition which was disposed directing the third respondent to consider and pass orders on the stay petition. It was also directed that revenue recovery proceedings would be kept in abeyance. Thereafter, the third respondent proceeded to hear the appeal itself. It would appear that the petitioner could not appear for the hearing despite notice. Accordingly, the third respondent rejected the appeal. The petitioner has since filed a restoration application stating the reasons for not appearing for the hearing of the appeal. He has now WP(C).No.11638/2014-D.
2 approached this Court when recovery steps were initiated as per Ext.P5 sale notice.
2. I have heard the learned Govt.Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. On a perusal of Ext.P8 order of the third respondent it is seen that the order passed is not one considering the merits of the petitioner's case but is one that rejects the appeal on the finding that none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case I feel that the writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to hear the appeal on merits after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. To enable the third respondent to do this I set aside Ext.P5 order. The petitioner shall appear before the third respondent on 22.5.2014 with all relevant documents to substantiate his contentions. The third respondent shall then dispose of the WP(C).No.11638/2014-D.
3 matter within a month. Coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P10 shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed on the appeal and communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, (Judge) Kvs/-
-// true copy //-