IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 8186 of 2011(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.TAJ GREEN COVE RESORT, KAVALAM, (UNIT OF MUTHOOT HOTELS PVT.LTD), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMPANY SECRETARY, SRI.VIMAL.S.V. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER (ENQUIRY), LUXURY TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, NEYYATTINKARA. 4. THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY, SALES TAX OFFICER (ENQUIRY - I), LUXURY TAX, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ami/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.8186 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P2 orders of assessment, completed under provisions of the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, the petitioner had preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. But first appellate authority had confirmed the assessment as per Exts.P6 and P7. Aggrieved by Exts.P6 and P7, the petitioner had preferred further appeal before the 2nd respondent Tribunal, as evidenced from Exts.P8 and P9. Exts.P10 and P11 are the stay petitions filed along with the appeals. It is submitted that the appeals as well as the stay petitions are pending consideration and disposal before the second respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that, without taking note of pendency of the appeals, coercive steps of recovery has now been pursued, on issuing Exts.P3 and P4 notice. 2. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents. Considering pendency of the 2 W.P.(C).No.8186 of 2011 statutory appeals and the stay petitions, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary directions to the appellate authority. 3. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P10 and P11 stay petitions filed along with the appeals, 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. Till such time orders are passed by the second respondent as directed above, recovery steps now initiated pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4 shall be kept in abeyance. 5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the second respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/