2015 (2) TMI 1307

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Vimal For The Respondent. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar,   JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P16 to P20 orders of penalty that have been passed against him under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, for the assessment years 2009 - 2010 to 2013 - 2014. 2. It is the specific case of the petitioner that, he is a dealer in water supply and sanitary goods including articles of brass.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Challenging the said orders, inter alia on the ground that they wrongly decided an issue of classification, and also on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing prior to the passing of the said orders, the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition. 3. I have heard Sri.K.U.Vijayan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cate as to why the products in question would not merit classification under the specific entry, and would rather be classifiable under the residual entry. In my view, such an exercise has necessarily to be done by an authority who proposes to impose a penalty on an assessee on the ground of mis-classification of an item. The issue of classification being a mixed question of law and fact, it is in....