IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9344 of 2011(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THOMAS P.GEORGE, PUTHUVANA AGENCIES, PANDALAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADVS: SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.K.UMAMAHESWAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 645. 2. THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 645. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER: SRI. V.K. SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SM C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 9344 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 order of assessment, which was modified, by the first appellate authority, through Ext.P2, the petitioner had preferred further appeal before the 2nd respondent as evidenced from Ext.P3. Ext.P4 is the stay petition filed along with the appeal. It is stated that the appeal as well as the stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before the 2nd respondent Tribunal. Grievance of the petitioner is that meanwhile coercive steps of recovery has been initiated on the basis of Ext.P5 notice to realise the amounts covered under Ext.P1, even without considering the modifications granted under Ext.P2 and the modified order of assessment issued under Ext.P6. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to restrain the recovery steps till the disposal of the appeal. 2. Considering the fact that the appellate Tribunal is in seizin of the matter, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the Tribunal to consider and WP(C).9344/2011 2 dispose of the matter on an expeditious basis. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that while granting interim relief the 2nd respondent Tribunal shall take note of various remittances already made, as well as the reduction of liability under the revised assessment. 4. Till such time orders are passed by the 2nd respondent, recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P5, to the extent of the liability due to the year 2008-09, shall be kept in abeyance. 5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).9344/2011 3