IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2011 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14631 of 2011(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ GEM OLEO CHEMICALS, DOOR NO.32/353, PUTHIYA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, BIJU PETER. BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALIDHARAN (AROOR) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 1ST CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY.PIN- -682 002. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 018. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY-682 002. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K. SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.14631 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Revenue recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to Ext.P4 notice was challenged in this proceedings. The amount sought to be realised pertains to assessment completed against the petitioner under Ext.P1 for the year 2007-'08. Contention of the petitioner is that, against Ext.P1 order of assessment he had approached the 2nd respondent in Ext.P2 appeal and the said appeal was heard on 6.9.2010. It is stated that the appeal was reserved for pronouncing orders and the recovery steps were initiated without awaiting orders on the appeal. 2. However, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that subsequent to filing of this writ petition he had received copy of the order passed by the 2nd respondent on Ext.P2 appeal. Since the appeal stands dismissed the petitioner is initiating steps to seek further remedy before the tribunal on filing second appeal. Since the period stipulated for filing such appeal is not expired the petitioner seeks indulgence of this court to restrain recovery steps for a reasonable period in order to facilitate filing of appeal before the tribunal. W.P.(C).14631/11 -2- 3. Considering the facts and circumstances as narrated above, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the respondents to keep in abeyance all further recovery steps for a reasonable period in order to facilitate the petitioner to seek appropriate statutory remedy against the order of the 2nd respondent appellate authority. 4. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery initiated pursuant to Ext.P4 for a period of one month from today in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the appellate tribunal and to seek appropriate relief against the order of assessment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb