IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6377 of 2008(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VSK HOME SHOPPEE, HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR.A.BALAKRISHNAN, HARIPAD-690 514. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, AUDIT ASSESSMENT, ALAPPUZHA, PIN CODE-688 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS), KOLLAM-691 012. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENGANNUR, PIN CODE-689 121. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY G.P. SHRI.TEC CHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.6377 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has been assessed to tax under the Kerala Value Added Tat Act by Ext.P1 order. Against the same, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition and, Ext.P4 petition to condone delay in filing the appeal, which are pending. In the meantime, Ext.P5 revenue recovery notice has been issued by the third respondent seeking to enforce payment under Ext.P1 assessment order. The petitioner challenges the revenue recovery proceedings on the ground that while the appeal and stay petition are pending, it is unjust to effect coercive recovery of the amounts covered by Ext.P1. 2. The learned Government Pleader points that the delay petition is still pending. Without disposal of the same, stay petition cannot be considered. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. I am of opinion that simply because the appellate authority has not chosen to dispose of the delay petition and w.p.c.6377/08 2 stay petition within a reasonable time, the petitioner cannot be allowed to suffer revenue recovery proceedings. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The 2nd respondent shall take up Ext.P4 delay petition and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the 2nd respondent allows the petition for condonation of delay, the 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 also. Till orders are thus passed by the 2nd respondent, further coercive proceedings for recovery of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 would be kept in abeyance, provided the petitioner pays Rs.25,000/- within two weeks from today. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.6377/08 3