IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2010 / 21ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29914 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SRI. C.ASHOKAN, ASOKA BHAVAN, PONMANA, P.O.CHAVARA, KOLLAM-691 583. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SMT.NIVEDITA A KAMATH RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-18. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT (ARREAR RECOVERYCELL), I.C.E.BHAVAN, PRESS CLUB ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 29914 of 2010-L ---------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 order, through which service tax as well as penalty was imposed, the petitioner had filed statutory appeal (Ext.P2) before the second respondent. The said appeal was filed under Section 85 of Finance Act 1994 (Act 32 of 1994). Ext.P3 is an interim application filed along with the appeal, seeking to dispense with the condition for pre-deposit of the tax and penalty due under Ext.P1. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that without passing any orders on Exts.P2 and P3 demand notice, Ext.P4 was issued threatening coercive steps of recovery. Under the above circumstances, the petitioner is seeking direction for an early disposal of the appeal and the interim petition and till then to keep in abeyance the recovery steps. 3. Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, learned counsel appearing for the respondents had filed a statement to the effect that the matter is now pending consideration before the appellate W.P(C) No. 29914 of 2010-L 2 authority and since no stay order has been granted, the department is justified in proceeding with steps for realisation of the amounts covered under Ext.P1. 4. Having considered pendency of the matter before the statutory appellate authority, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the appellate authority to take appropriate steps within a time frame. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 petition after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 6. Till such time orders are passed by the second respondent as directed above, further steps of recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance. 7. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the second respondent. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab //True Copy//