IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2009 / 24TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29295 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.COMPUTER GRAPHICS LTD., 42/2431-B,ST.BENEDICT'S JUNCTION, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, SRI.K.VENKAT SAI. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.ABHILASH T.G. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) SPECIAL CIRCLE-I,ERNAKULAM. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SQUAD NO.II,MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 4. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOCHI-30. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.29295 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Against Ext.P1 order imposing penalty pertaining to the year 2005-06 the petitioner had preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the 3rd respondent, as early as on 16.12.2008. Along with the said appeal the petitioner had also filed stay petition as evidenced by Ext.P5. It is submitted that Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P5 stay petition are pending disposal before the 3rd respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that before finalising the appeal filed against the order of penalty, now the 2nd respondent had proceeded with assessment of the petitioner, based on the allegations upon which the penalty was imposed. Ext.P2 is the assessment order issued in this regard dt.29.6.09. Against Ext.P2 order of assessment the petitioner again preferred Ext.P4 appeal along with stay petition as evidenced by Ext.P6. But the 3rd respondent has not taken any action to dispose of the appeals or stay petitions. Recovery steps has now been initiated as evidenced by Ext.P7 and P8 demand notices, for realisation of the amounts covered under Ext.P1 order of penalty and Ext.P2 order of assessment. Under the above circumstances W.P.(C)29295/09-F 2 the petitioner is seeking directions for an early disposal of the appeals and to keep in abeyance recovery steps till then. 2. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 3rd respondent appellate authority to consider and dispose of the matter on an early basis. 3. In the result the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 and P6 stay petitions, after adverting to the contentions raised by the petitioner in Ext.P3 and P4 appeals, and 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 receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. The respondents are directed to keep in abeyance further steps for realisation of the amounts covered under Ext.P1 and P2, pursuant to demand notices issued under Ext.P7 and P8, till orders are passed on the stay petitions as directed above. 5. The 3rd respondent will also take earnest endeavour to dispose of the appeals at the earliest. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb