IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34103 of 2010(K) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- THOMAS GEORGE, PROPRIETOR, MODI BUILDERS, NO.1/426A, NELLAD, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADVS. SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN SRI.EBY AUGUSTINE SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (EC & LT), OFFICE OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 2. DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVALLA-689 101. * ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER(WC & LT) KOLLAM. * ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED IS AS PER ORDER DATED 15/11/2010 IN I.A. NO. 15874/2010. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 34103 OF 2010 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Challenge in this Writ Petition is against Ext.P3 order of assessment issued under Section 22 (3) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act) for the period from January, 2010 to March, 2010 and against the revenue recovery steps initiated pursuant to Exts.P4 and P5 notices. 2. It is mentioned that against Ext.P3 order, the petitioner had preferred statutory appeal before the additional 3rd respondent. Ext.P6 is the copy of the appeal. Along with Ext.P6, the petitioner had also filed stay petition, as evident from Ext.P7. According to the petitioner, the appeal as well as stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before the 3rd respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that by virtue of coercive steps initiated, the Bank account of the petitioner was attached and the petitioner is not in a position to continue 2 WP(C) No. 34103/2010 his business activities. 3. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering pendency of the statutory appeal before the 3rd respondent, I am of the view that the petitioner can be relegated to that authority to seek appropriate interim relief. 4. Under the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 application for stay, if the appeal filed by the petitioner is in order and the same has already been registered before that authority, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. Till such time orders are issued by the 3rd respondent as directed above, recovery steps now initiated against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance and the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the bank accounts. 3 WP(C) No. 34103/2010 6. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc