Limitation in tax penalty proceedings cannot be conclusively decided in writ jurisdiction when disputed facts require appellate adjudication.

Where limitation for tax penalty proceedings depends on disputed facts such as the date of detection, the nature of inspection, the materials recovered, and the sequence of verification, the High Court should not finally determine the issue in writ jurisdiction. The reasonable-period principle was noted as relevant to penalty proceedings under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, but its application required factual adjudication on the record. The limitation question was therefore left open for decision by the statutory appellate authority, and the writ decision was set aside to that extent.

---

---

Issues: Whether the question of limitation for penalty proceedings under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could be finally decided in writ jurisdiction, or whether the assessee had to be relegated to the statutory appellate forum for factual adjudication.

Analysis: The limitation question depended upon the date of detection of offence, the nature of inspection, the materials recovered, the sequence of verification, and the manner in which the authorities proceeded on the available records. The Court noted that although no limitation was provided under Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, proceedings had to be initiated within a reasonable period, and that principle was also relevant to Section 67 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. However, the exact date of detection and the consequences flowing from it were held to be matters requiring factual adjudication, particularly because the proceedings were linked to earlier action by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and the Commissioner of Customs.

Conclusion: The issue of limitation was not adjudicated on merits in writ jurisdiction and was left to be urged before the statutory appellate authority.

Final Conclusion: The writ court's decision was set aside to the extent it had decided the matter on limitation, and the assessee was relegated to the appellate remedy for a merits-based determination.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the plea of limitation in tax penalty proceedings turns on disputed facts and the date of detection of offence, the High Court should not conclusively decide the issue under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and should leave the parties to the statutory appellate process.

---