JUDGMENT

Antony Dominic, J.

Petitioner in W.P.(C)2852/2017 is the appellant. The writ petition was filed challenging Exts.P19 and P20 orders of assessment passed under the KVAT Act for the assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. By the judgment under appeal, the learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the assessment orders and held that the remedy available to the appellant is to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal. It is aggrieved by this judgment, the writ appeal is filed.

2. We heard the counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. The submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant is that on receipt of Exts.P5 and P6, pre-assessment notices, Exts.P7 and P8 replies were filed in which they had sought for certain materials that were relied on against them. It is stated that when the appellant was informed that only some of the materials were available with the first respondent and the remaining were available with the second respondent, appellant made Ext.P11 request to the second respondent for obtaining the materials. It is stated that no action whatsoever was taken on Ext.P11. While so, they were issued fresh