IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18137 of 2011(N) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S.BRMSCO GARMENTS (P) LTD., ONAKKOOR, ANCHELPETTY P.O., ERNAKULAM-686 667, REPRESENTED BY SRI.A.R. SASIKUMAR, MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR, SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ, SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERNAKULAM-682 016. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.BIJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 18137 of 2011(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/10/2010 FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 29/06/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 18137 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed by the assessing authority, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay application. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that before the appellate authority could consider the stay application, by Ext.P4 notice, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated. The petitioner submits that it is unjust to enforce recovery through coercive proceedings when the stay application is still undisposed of. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I am also of opinion that it is unjust to enforce recovery proceedings without first disposing of the stay application. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay application filed by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till orders are so passed, further coercive proceedings initiated including revenue recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge