ORDER
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.
1. Heard both the learned counsel at the stage of admission.
2. The provisional assessment orders dated March 20, 1998 passed for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 are being challenged in this writ petition.
3. It is surprising why the provisional assessment has been resorted to long after the expiry of relevant assessment years. Another extraordinary step taken by the assessing officer is that having waited for two years to make such assessment, he restricts the tune for payment to seven days as against the normal time of 30 days allowed by the Rules. Even before the expiry of appeal time, the respondent concerned acted overzealously and in unseemly haste to collect the tax, more so when a substantial question needs to be decided in appeal. The orders of this nature undoubtedly undermine the confidence of the tax-payers in the administration of tax law and gives rise to an undesirable impression that the department is following the principle of end justifying the means. We cannot but disapprove and deprecate such action on the part of the first respondent.
4. While we decline to entertain the writ petition on account of the existence of effective alternative remedy, but, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax for a period of one month so that the petitioner may seek appropriate remedies.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.