IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22748 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- GOLDEN WATERS,A UNIT OF ALEX RESORTS HOTELS PVT.LTD,KUMARAKAM,KOTTAYAM-686 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR S.M.ALEX. BY ADV. MR. K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE MR. MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER(LT), KOTTAYAM-686001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES,KOLLAM-691 001. 3. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,KOTTAYAM-686 001. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 22748 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 21st day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of the assessments made by the concerned assessing authority, the petitioner has preferred Exts. P2, P5 and P6 appeals in respect of the different assessment years 2003-'04, 2004-'05 and 2005-'06, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. When coercive proceedings were taken in respect of the assessment years 2003-'04 and 2004-'05, the petitioner had to approach this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C) 13799 of 2009, praying for some other reliefs as well; which culminated in Ext. P5 judgment, whereby the statement made by the petitioner that the petitioner was intending to avail the benefits under the 'Amnesty Scheme' was taken note of and appropriate directions were given to have the matter finalized as specified therein. With regard to the assessment in respect of the assessment year 2005-'06, the petitioner has preferred Ext. P8 appeal along with Ext. P9 petition for stay, in spite of which, the respondents have issued Ext. P12 Revenue Recovery notice, which is sought to be challenged simultaneously challenging Exts. P10 and P11 recovery notices pertaining to the previous years as well. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. W.P. (C) No. 22748 of 2010 : 2 : 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the second respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P12 petition for 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 time, the coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner pursuant to Ext. P12 shall be kept in abeyance. The coercive proceedings pursued against the petitioner as borne by Exts. P10 and P11 with regard to the previous assessment years 2003-'04 and 2004-'05 shall also be kept in abeyance, till the final decision taken in compliance with the direction given by this Court as per Ext. P6 judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd