IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2010 / 2ND POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38511 of 2010(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- YENKAY COMPLEX PVT.LTD., AZHINJILAM,FEROKE COLLEGE P.O, MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN 673 632, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDL.DIRECTOR SRI. RAVEENDRAN .A.C. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM), SRI. K.S. HARIHARAN, SMT. K. UMA MAHESWAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,(W.C & L.T) MALAPPAURAM 676 505. 2. THE DY.COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM- 682 015. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MANJERI -676 121. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.38511 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Through Ext.P1(a) the assessment under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976 was finalised against the petitioner, with respect to the year 2007-'08. So also, under Ext.P1(b), penalty was imposed on the petitioner with respect to the same period. The petitioner had challenged the above said orders by filing statutory appeals before the 2nd respondent as evidenced from Ext.P2(a) and P2(b). The petitioner had also filed applications seeking stay as per Ext.P3(a) and P3(b). Ext.P4(a) and P4(b) are the petitions filed seeking early hearing of the appeals. It is the grievance of the petitioner that without considering pendency of the appeals and accompanying applications recovery steps has now been initiated on the basis of Ext.P6 notice issued under the provisions of the Kerala W.P.(C).38511/10-L -2- Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to restrain the recovery steps till the disposal of the appeals. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the liability for payment of tax under the Act in question itself is under challenge. He further points out that with respect to the previous year, against the order imposing penalty, this court in Ext.P5 had granted absolute stay. I am of the view that these are matters which can be raised before the statutory appellate authority while considering granting of interim relief. I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to have an earlier disposal of the matter. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3(a) and P3(b) taking note of all contentions of the petitioner after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this W.P.(C).38511/10-L -3- judgment. 3. Till such time orders are passed by the appellate authority, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P1(a) and P1(b), which are now initiated pursuant to Ext.P6 revenue recovery notice, shall be kept in abeyance. 4. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb