High Court Kerala High Court

Jinmol Babu vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 11 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
Jinmol Babu vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 11 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25126 of 2010(M)


1. JINMOL BABU, PROPRIETRIX,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,CIRCLE-11,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS),

3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :11/08/2010

 O R D E R
               P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
                 -------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) No. 25126 OF 2010
                 --------------------------------------
          Dated this the 11th day of August, 2010

                        J U D G M E N T

~~~~~~~~~~~

The issue involved is as to the correctness and

sustainability of CST assessment in respect of the assessment

year 2005-2006. The petitioner, being aggrieved of Ext.P1

assessment order, has already preferred Ext.P2 appeal along

with Ext.P3 petition to condone the delay in filing the same and

also accompanied by Ext.P4 petition for stay. It is also the case

of the petitioner that the petitioner has received ‘C’ Forms,

copies of which have been produced and marked as Exts.P5 and

P5A. The petitioner is stated as constrained to approach this

Court because of the coercive steps being pursued in the

meanwhile as borne by Ext.P6 notice issued under the Revenue

Recovery Act.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

W.P.(C) No.25126/2010 2

3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the 2nd

respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders

on Ext.P3 petition to condone the delay and Ext.P4 petition for

stay, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. It is made clear that till appropriate orders are

passed on the above said interlocutory applications, all further

proceedings pursuant to Ext.P6 shall be kept in abeyance.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

(P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE)

ps/12/8