IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2010 / 10TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20432 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- C.SANDHYA, GOURI INDANE SERVICE CHUNANGUMVELI, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER III, ALUVA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/ AUTHORISED OFFICER O/O. COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERY, KOCHI. 4. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR(REVENUE RECOVERY) OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, O/O. COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERY, KOCHI. BY SR . GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 20432 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 1st July , 2010 J U D G M E N T Exts.P1, P3 and P5 assessment orders passed by the second respondent are under challenge in Exts. P6, P7 and P8 appeals preferred by the petitioner along with Exts. P6(a) P7(a) and P8(a) interlocutory applications for stay, which are pending consideration before the first respondent . The grievance of the petitioner is that without any regard to the pendency of the above proceedings , Ext. P9 recovery notice has been issued at the instance of the respondents, which hence is sought to be intercepted. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the assessments happened to be finalised only because of the fact that the petitioner could not appear on the scheduled day as he was engaged otherwise in connection with the treatment of a near relative. The learned Counsel further refers to the contents of the Ext. P2 issued by the Indian Oil Corporation, whereby the concerned '4' loads (which contribute much to the turnover as W.P.(C) No. 20432 OF 2010 2 stated in Ext.P1/P3 assessment orders and the 5th item/load ( referred to in Ext. P5) have been cancelled stating that the said loads had never been released to the petitioner. The learned Counsel further submits that all these vital aspects have been explained in the appeals. In the above circumstances, the first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, on Exts.P6(a), P7(a) and P8(a) interlocutory applications for stay, taking note of the factual position as observed above and such other materials, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment . It is made clear that till such orders are passed on the above applications for stay, all further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P9 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk