IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2011 / 28TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 19446 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JOHN BEHNAN M/S.DES INTERNATIONAL,PADOOR P.O.,KAVASSERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALATHUR-678 541 2. THE APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR) ALATHUR-678 541 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.19446/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 19/04/2011. P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12/07/2011. P3 COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12/07/2011. P4 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12/07/2011. P5 COPY OF THE EARLY HEARING PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12/07/2011. P6 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 27/06/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 19446 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 application to condone delay and Ext.P4 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that before the appellate authority could consider the interim applications, the 1st respondent has initiated recovery proceedings for recovery of the tax disputed in the appeal. The petitioner submits that it is unjust to enforce the recovery proceedings before the appellate authority could consider the interim applications. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. I am also of opinion that before the appellate authority could consider the interim applications, it is unjust to initiate coercive recovery proceedings. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The 2nd respondent appellate authority shall consider Exts.P3 and P4 applications together. If the appellate authority is W.P.(C)No.19446/11 2 inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal, the orders shall also be passed on Ext.P4 stay petition. This shall be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then, coercive recovery proceedings for recovery of the tax disputed in the appeal shall be kept in abeyance. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.19446/11 3