IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2011 / 2ND ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16886 of 2011(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S.BRIGHT ELECTRICALS, G.H. ROAD, CALICUT, BY MANAGER P.BASHEER. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH, SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER IIND CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE-673 006. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), CALICUT-673 006. 3. SALES TAX OFFICER (RECOVERY), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673 006. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.V.K. SHAMSUDHEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 16886 of 2011(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2009-10 DATED 23/02/2011. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P1 ORDER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPLY TO LAWYER NOTICE DATED 28/03/2011. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE U/S.67(2) OF KVAT ACT DATED 21/03/2011. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25/03/2011. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S.67(2) DATED 30/03/2011. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P7 ORDER. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT.P7 APPEAL. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE DATED 19/04/2011. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE RR NOTICE DATED 16/06/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 16886 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Assessment was finalised against the petitioner by virtue of Ext.P1 order, with respect to the year 2009-2010. The petitioner challenged the assessment in a statutory appeal filed before the 2nd respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P2. It is stated that the said appeal was heard by the 2nd respondent on 28.4.2011 as evidenced from Ext.P10 posting notice, and the matter now stands reserved for pronouncing orders. In the meanwhile the 1st respondent had imposed penalty on the petitioner through Ext.P7 order alleging that the petitioner had failed to make payment of amounts covered under Ext.P1 order of assessment. Against the order imposing penalty, the petitioner had also filed appeal before the 2nd respondent as evidenced from Ext.P8, accompanied with stay petition as per Ext.P9. Grievance of the petitioner is that now coercive steps has been initiated on the basis of Ext.P11 notice issued for recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P1 order. WP(C) .16886/2011 2 2. Considering pendency of the matter before the 2nd respondent, I am of the view that a direction for an early disposal by the 2nd respondent will serve the ends of justice. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pronounce orders on Ext.P2 appeal on the basis of the hearing conducted on 28.4.2011, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 3. The 2nd respondent is also directed to dispose of Ext.P8 appeal after disposal of Ext.P2 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of pronouncing orders on Ext.P2 appeal. 4. Till such time the 2nd respondent passes orders on Ext.P2 appeal , the recovery steps now initiated pursuant to Ext.P11 shall be kept in abeyance. It is further directed that till Ext.P8 appeal is disposed of, the amount of penalty covered under Ext.P7 shall not be recovered. WP(C) .16886/2011 3 5. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the appellate authority. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/