IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2010 / 17TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 413 of 2010(B) ------------------------ PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.PREETHY COCONUT PRODUCTS, THANNISSERY, PALAKKAD, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER TOM C.GEORGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHAKARA MENON RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE, I CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 413 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 7th January , 2010 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has approached the third respondent/appellate authority by filing Ext.P4 (a) memorandum of appeal with Ext.P4(b) petition for early posting and P4(c) petition for stay. Similar proceedings have also been filed before the very same respondent in respect of Ext.P6 assessment order for the subsequent year 2007-08 as borne by Ext.P8 series. The grievance against Ext.P2 assessment order under CST Act in respect of 2006-07 has been sought to be remedied by filing Ext.P3 petition, which is pending consideration before the second respondent for rectifying the errors/mistakes. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is without any regard to the pendency of the proceedings that the 4th respondent has issued Ext. P10(a) and (b) demand notices , which hence are sought to be intercepted by this Court. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. After considering the facts and circumstances, the Writ W.P.(C) No. 413 OF 2010 2 Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 and the third respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 series and P8 series of proceedings filed before him in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that till such appropriate orders are passed on Ext.P4(c) and P8(c) petitions for stay and also on Ext.P3 petition for rectification of errors filed before the second respondent, all further coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P10(a) and (b) shall be kept in abeyance. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk