IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27647 of 2010(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SRI.M.P.YUSUFF AMEER, PROPRIETOR, M P A COMPANY, BIYYAM, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (AA), COMMERCIAL TAXES, MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI. 678002. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONNANI.678001. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.682 031. 4. THE INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI. 678 001. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.695 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEERN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.27647 of 2010-E ---------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T Assessments with respect to the year 2006-07 under the provisions of KVAT Act and CST Act was finalised as per Ext.P4 order. Aggrieved by the assessment, the petitioner filed Exts.P6 and P6(a) appeals respectively under the KVAT Act and CST Act. The appeals were filed along with Exts.P7 and P7(a) petitions seeking condonation of delay. Along with the appeals, the petitioner had also filed stay petitions as evidenced from Exts.P8 and P8(a). 2. According to the petitioner, the appeals as well as the accompanying petitions are pending consideration and disposal before the third respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that in the meanwhile respondents are proceeding with coercive steps of recovery for realising amounts covered under assessment, as evidenced from Ext.P1 notice. It is contended by the petitioner that all the payments effected by the petitioner has not been given proper credit while finalising the assessment. The petitioner is also assailing liability fixed for payment of CST on the ground that said W.P(C) No.27647 of 2010-E 2 assessment is not at all sustainable. It is also contended that necessary declaration forms are available with the petitioner, which could not be produced before the assessing authority. 3. I am not considering the above said contentions on its merits because the statutory appeal is pending disposal before the appellate authority. Therefore I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary directions to the appellate authority to have an early disposal of the matter. 4. The third respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Exts.P7 and P7(a) petitions filed seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the delay in filing the appeals are condoned, the third respondent shall consider and pass orders on Exts.P8 and P8(a) stay petitions, simultaneously. 5. Till such time orders are passed by the third respondent as directed above, recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P4, which is now being pursued on issuing Ext.P1 notice, shall be kept in abeyance. W.P(C) No.27647 of 2010-E 3 6. Petitioner will produce a copy of the judgment before the third respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. C.K.ABDUL REHIM ab JUDGE