M.Krishnadas vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 10 November, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 33931 of 2010(N)


1. M.KRISHNADAS,PROPRIETOR,BABAS HITECH
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE

3. THE INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.S.K.DEVI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :10/11/2010

 O R D E R
                C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J
                ------------------------------
             WP(C) NO. 33931 OF 2010
            --------------------------------------
      Dated this the 10th day of November, 2010


                       JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment the

petitioner had filed first appeal before the Deputy

Commissioner. Ext.P2 is the appellate order issued by

that authority. Being aggrieved by Ext.P2, the petitioner

had preferred further appeal before the second

respondent Tribunal as evidenced from Ext.P3. Ext.P4 is

the stay petition filed along with the appeal. It is stated

that Ext.P3 appeal as well as the stay petition are

pending consideration and disposal before the second

respondent Tribunal. Grievance of the petitioner is that

now the 3rd respondent had initiated coercive steps of

recovery, without considering pendency of the appeal

before the Tribunal.

2. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing

on behalf of respondents. Considering pendency of the

2
WP(C) No. 33931/2010

appeal before the second respondent Tribunal, I am of the

view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of directing that

Tribunal to have an expedious consideration of the matter.

3. The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the

second respondent Tribunal to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P4 stay petition after affording an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner as early as possible, at any rate

within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

4. Till such time orders are passed by the second

respondent as directed above, recovery of amounts covered

under Ext.P1 which is modified through Ext.P2, shall be

kept in abeyance.

5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this

judgment before the 2nd respondent.

C.K. ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE
dnc