IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 37342 of 2008(U)
1. P.G.SANKARANARAYANAN NAIR
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
... Respondent
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
3. TAHSILDAR (RR) PATHANAMTHITTA
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KULANADA.
For Petitioner :SRI. K.SHAJ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :18/12/2008
O R D E R
K.M.JOSEPH, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WP.(C) No.37342 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 18th day of December, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges Exts.P7 and P8 demand notices.
2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Pleader.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Exts.P5 and
P6 are appeals filed against the assessment orders. In regard to Ext.P5 there
is delay and the petitioner filed a delay condonation petition.
The writ petition is disposed of as follows:
In regard to Ext.P5, if the petitioner files an application seeking
stay within one week from today, there will be a direction to the first
respondent to consider and take a decision on the application for
condonation of delay filed in Ext.P5 and if the delay is condoned, there will
be a further direction to the first respondent to consider and take a decision
on the application for stay within one month from the date of filing of the
application. There will also be a direction that if the petitioner files an
application for stay in Ext.P6 within one week from today, the first
respondent will consider and take a decision on the same within one month
from the date of filing of the application. Till such time as a decision is
WPC. 37342/2008. 2
taken, recovery steps will be kept in abeyance. Needless to say, if the
petitioner does not file applications seeking stay, recovery proceedings can
be proceeded with.
(K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE)
sb