IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 8411 of 2009(V) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K. RADHAMONY, PROPRIETOR, BHARATHI RUBBERS, KATTUMPURAM, VADAMON, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) & K.S. HARIHARAN. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (AUDIT ASSESSMENT), KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (I.B.), COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DY. COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), KOLLAM. 4. INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTARAKKARA. 5. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 8411 OF 2009 V -------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th March, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order in Ext.P2 Appeal. Ext.P3 is the delay condonation petition in Ext.P2 Appeal. Ext.P4 is the Assessment Order. Against Ext.P4, petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 Appeal and Ext.P6 application for stay and Ext.P7 early hearing petition. In the meantime, petitioner is faced with Ext.P8 Revenue Recovery Notice. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. It is submitted by Shri S. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to Ext.P1 order, petitioner has paid off the entire amount. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: There will be a direction to the third respondent to consider and take a decision on Ext.P3 application for condonation of delay and if the delay is condoned, the third respondent will consider and take a decision on Ext.P2 Appeal WPC.8411/09 V 2 in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. There will be a further direction to the third respondent to take up the application for condonation of delay in filing Ext.P5 Appeal and if the delay is condoned, the third respondent will consider and take a decision on Ext.P6 application for stay in accordance with law within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P8 will be kept in abeyance till a decision is taken. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge