K.S. Paripoornan, J.
1. The petitioner in Original Petition No. 2655 of 1989 is the appellant. The respondent is the Revenue. The petitioner is an assessee to agricultural income-tax. By exhibit P-4 dated February 18, 1989, the appellant was assessed for four years from 1983-84 to 1986-87 under Section 18(4) of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act. The attack in the original petition was against exhibit P-4. It was argued that exhibit P-4 is illegal and void, in that the assessee was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to file his objections and exhibit P-4 was rendered in undue haste. The learned single judge dismissed the original petition. The petitioner in the original petition has come up in appeal.
2. In the appeal, the appellant has filed exhibit X-1, a proceeding passed by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, dated March 28, 1989. It is stated therein that in pursuance to the pre-assessment notice dated February 9, 1989, issued to the assessee and received by him on February 11, 1989, the assessee did not file his objections within seven days as stipulated in the notice, exhibit P-1. The application filed by the appellant to cancel the assessment under Section 19 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act was rejected by exhibit X-1.
3. We heard counsel for the appellant, as also learned Government Pleader. The relevant assessment records were produced before us. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer who passed exhibit P-4 as also exhibit X-l proceedings was also present in court. It is evident that the assessing authority required the assessee (appellant) to file his objections to the pre-assessment notice within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. Exhibit P-l shows this. This notice was received by the assessee on February 11, 1989. The assessee file his objections dated February 25, 1989, which reached the officer on February 27, 1989. It is evident from exhibit P-3. Exhibit P-4 assessment order is dated February 18, 1989. The officer has admitted in exhibit X-l that the assessment was finalised on February 18, 1989. The officer would further state that the time to file objections expired on February 17, 1989, see exhibit X-1. This is a patent error. The assessment, exhibit P-4, was finalised on February 18, 1989, on the mistaken impression that the time to file objections expired on February 17, 1989. Indeed, the assessee had time to file his objections till and inclusive of February 18, 1989. Before the expiry of that period, the assessing authority was not empowered or competent to pass the best judgment assessment under Section 18(4) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act. The assessing authority had no jurisdiction to render exhibit P-4 on February 18, 1989. Exhibit P-4 is illegal and void. There has been denial of natural justice and failure to comply with the provisions of the Agricultural Income-tax Act. On this short ground, exhibit P-4 assessment order for the years 1983-84 to 1986-87 should stand annulled. The fact that the assessee (appellant) did not file the objections before the expiry of seven days, but filed it only on February 25, 1989, is an irrelevant factor in considering whether exhibit P-4 was passed with jurisdiction. In this view of the matter, we quash exhibit P-4.
4. In the said circumstances of the case, wo direct the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, the 1st respondent herein, to consider the objections filed by the appellant, dated February 25, 1980, and proceed to make the assessments. Indeed, the appellant's counsel, Mr. Vijayan Menon, also prayed only for a consideration of his objections before finalising the assessments. In the light of our direction to the assessing authority to consider the objections before finalising the assessments, no further directions are called for.
5. The writ appeal is disposed of as above.