IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2010 / 25TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25598 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.PALAKKAD RUBBER PVT.LTD., NIDA, KANJIKOD, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, V.H.NOORSALAM, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.HUSSAIN KHAN, VELLATHOTTAM HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATIFF RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, II CIRCLE, PALAKKAD-678 001. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001. GP MR.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dmb P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 25598 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Being aggrieved of the steps taken by the assessing authority with regard to the fixation of tax, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) 15636/2009. After hearing both the sides, the appellate authority was directed to consider the appeal and to pass final orders therein; which led to Ext.P2 order. The petitioner, still being aggrieved has preferred Second Appeal before the 1st respondent as borne by Ext.P4, along with Ext.P5 petition to condone the delay and also Ext.P6 petition for stay, which are still pending. The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the coercive proceedings being pursued in the meanwhile, which hence is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. W.P.(C) No.25598/2010 2 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P5 and P6 interlocutory applications, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, within 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that till such orders are passed in the aforesaid interlocutory applications, all further coercive proceedings, if any, stated as being pursued against the petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) ps/18/8