IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON SATURDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2009 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14128 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S. UNITED BUSINESS CORPORATION, THAZHEPALAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PAPRTNER, T. SIVADASA MENON. BY ADV. MR. N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL, TAX OFFICER (AA), MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 14128 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 23rd May, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner for realisation of the tax despite the pendency of the appeal filed challenging the impugned assessment order. Ext. P1 is the assessment order passed by the first respondent in respect of the year 2005-06, which has been subjected to challenge by filing Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 petition for interim stay and also Ext. P4 petition for early hearing of the appeal. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the third respondent has proceeded with coercive steps as evident from Exts.P5 and P6, which hence are sought to be interfered with. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this W.P.(C) No. 14128 OF 2009 2 Court finds it fit and proper to have the matter disposed of, giving appropriate directions to the second respondent/appellate authority to consider Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition at the earliest, of course, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which hence is ordered accordingly. It is also made clear that till appropriate orders are passed on Ext.P3 I.A. for stay , all further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P1 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk