IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 6TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25767 of 2011(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- A.A. FRANCIS, FRANJO ENGINEERING CORPORATION, RAZI PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 678 001. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 25767/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22/06/2011. P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03/09/2011. P3: COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03/09/2011. P4: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03/09/2011. P5: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DATED 17/08/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 25767 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th day of September, 2011. J U D G M E N T Against Ext. P1 penalty order, the petitioner has filed Ext. P2 appeal along with Ext. P3 petition to condone the delay and Ext. P4 petition for stay of recovery proceedings. The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings initiated by the assessing authority for coercive recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner seeks stay of recovery till the appellate authority gets an opportunity to consider the stay petition. The learned Government Pleader points out that since there is delay in filing the appeals, the appellate authority cannot consider the stay petitions without first considering the petitions to condone the delay. 2. After hearing both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The 2nd respondent shall consider the petition to condone the delay as well as the stay petition together within one month. If the 2nd respondent is inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal, the 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on the stay petition as well. Till disposal of the stay petition, the coercive recovery proceedings shall shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/