Retired partner liability under sales tax rules turned on departmental notice of retirement and undisputed facts, not formal defect.

A retired partner was held not liable for the firm's sales tax dues where the retirement deed had been received by the Department before the relevant assessment year and the Department's own proceedings showed awareness of the retirement. On those facts, the object of Rule 5(8) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules was treated as satisfied despite non-submission of the prescribed form. The court also found no reason to relegate the party to the statutory alternative remedy because the factual position was undisputed, making examination of the merits appropriate.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant, having retired from the partnership firm and having the retirement deed received by the Department, could still be proceeded against for recovery of the firm's sales tax dues for the assessment year 2002-2003, and whether the writ court ought to have relegated him to the statutory alternative remedy.

Analysis: The retirement deed showing the appellant's retirement in 2000 had been received by the Department well before the relevant assessment year. The Department's own conduct in the connected penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings also reflected that it was aware that the appellant was no longer a partner. In those circumstances, the object of Rule 5(8) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules was held to have been met on the facts, notwithstanding non-submission of the prescribed form. Since the factual position was not in dispute, there was no need to drive the appellant to the alternative statutory remedy.

Conclusion: The appellant could not be made liable for the firm's tax dues for the assessment year 2002-2003, and the writ court's refusal to examine the merits on the ground of alternative remedy was unwarranted.

---