IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 7220 of 2010(B)
1. TISSAN.J.THACHANKARY, CHAIRMAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),
... Respondent
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WC & LT),
3. THE APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
5. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
For Petitioner :SRI.KKM.SHERIF
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :05/03/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
..............................................................................
W.P.(C) No. 7220 OF 2010
.........................................................................
Dated this the 5th March, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved of Exts.P3, P16 and P16(a)
recovery notices issued seeking to realise the amount stated as
due from him in respect of various assessment orders passed
by the concerned authorities.
2. Challenging Ext.P4 common appellate order passed by
the first respondent in respect of assessment years 2003-04
and 2004-05, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P5 and P5(a)
appeals along with Exts.P6 and P6 (a) petitions to condone the
delay in filing the appeals and Exts. P7 and P7(a) petitions for
stay which are stated as pending before the 5th
respondent/Tribunal. Similarly with regard to the assessment
year 2005-06, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P9 appeal, along
with Ext.P10 petition to condone the delay in filing the same
and Ext. P11 petition for stay. So also, with regard to the
W.P.(C) No. 7220 OF 2010
2
assessment year 2006-07, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P13
appeal along with Ext.P14 petition to condone the delay in filing
the same and also Ext.P15 petition for stay . The proceedings in
respect of assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 are stated
as pending consideration before the first respondent. The case
of the petitioner is that, without any regard to the pendency of
the above proceedings, recovery proceedings are being pursued
against the petitioner, which hence are under challenge in this
Writ Petition.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the first
respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders
on Exts.P10, P11, P14 and P15. Similarly, the fifth
respondent/Tribunal is directed to consider and pass appropriate
orders on Exts.P6, P6(a), P7 and P7(a) . Appropriate orders as
above shall be passed in the I.As seeking for condonation of
delay and also in the I.As for interim stay, in accordance with
law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month
from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Till such
W.P.(C) No. 7220 OF 2010
3
orders are passed in the above I.As, all further coercive
proceedings pursuant to Exts.P3, P16 and P16(a) shall be kept
in abeyance.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
lk