High Court Kerala High Court

M/S.Hindustan Lubricants … vs State Of Kerala on 19 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
M/S.Hindustan Lubricants … vs State Of Kerala on 19 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1779 of 2010(V)


1. M/S.HINDUSTAN LUBRICANTS COMPANY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),

4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.A.CHACKO

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :19/01/2010

 O R D E R
                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
                      -----------------------------------------------
                              WP(C) No. 1779 of 2010
                           --------------------------------------
                   Dated, this the 19th day of January, 2010


                                  J U D G M E N T

Challenging Ext.P1 assessment order passed by the 4th respondent, the

petitioner had taken up the matter by filing First Appeal before the 3rd respondent,

which however turned to be in vain as interference is declined vide Ext.P2. Met

with the said situation, the petitioner has preferred Second Appeal as borne by

Ext.P3 before the second respondent, along with a petition for stay and the said

proceedings are stated as still pending. The petitioner is aggrieved of the non-

consideration of the above proceedings and has approached this Court,

apprehending the coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the 2nd respondent is

directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as

possible. It is made clear that, till such appropriate orders are passed in the I.A.

for stay, filed along with Ext.P3 appeal, all further coercive steps stated as being

pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
dnc