IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1845 of 2008(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ASIA MATCH COMPANY PVT. LTD., NALKAVALA, THRIKKODITHANAM, CHANGANACHERRY, PIN-686 105, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. A.ASHOK. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 002. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (A.A.), KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 002. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS), KOLLAM, PIN-691 012. 4. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 002. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER (TAXES), SRI.TEK CHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ======================= W.P.(C) No.1845 of 2008(T) ======================= Dated this the 15th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. In respect of assessment for the months of June 2005 to March 2006 and April 2006 to March 2007, penalty proceedings were initiated and confirmed by Exts. P1 and P2 orders. Against Exts.P1 and P2 orders, the petitioner filed Exts. P3 and P4 appeals along with Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 stay petition. Petitioner is now aggrieved by Ext.P7 and P8 revenue recovery notice by which coercive proceedings have been initiated for recovery of the disputed penalty. Petitioner seeks stay of recovery proceedings pending disposal of the appeals filed by the petitioner. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In so far as the petitioner has already moved the 3rd respondent in appeal and have also filed a stay petition, it is proper to 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders, as expeditiously as W.P.(C) No.1845/2008/T -2- possible. It is also not proper on the part of the respondents 1 and 2 to enforce recovery until the petitioner can move the appellate authority for stay. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts. P5 and P6 stay petition, as expeditiously as possible. Till orders are passed on the stay petition, further proceedings for recovery of disputed penalty as per Exts.P1 and P2 orders and revenue recovery by Exts.P7 and P8 proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE jp