IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 6TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25725 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- M/S. THOMSON SURGICALS (P) LTD., NATTUKAL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ELSAMMA THOMAS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, MANNARKKAD 678 582. 2. ASST. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 678 001 3. INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 678 001 R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SHAMSUDHEEN V.K. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JJJ WP(C).NO: 25725 of 2011(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT P2: COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT P3: COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT P4: COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT P5: COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN FORM NO:1 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE JJJ S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 25725 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th day of September, 2011. J U D G M E N T Against Ext. P1 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext. P2 appeal along with Ext. P3 petition to condone the delay and Ext. P4 petition for stay of recovery proceedings. The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings initiated by the assessing authority for coercive recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner seeks stay of recovery till the appellate authority gets an opportunity to consider the stay petition. The learned Government Pleader points out that since there is delay in filing the appeals, the appellate authority cannot consider the stay petitions without first considering the petitions to condone the delay. 2. After hearing both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The 2nd respondent shall consider the petition to condone the delay as well as the stay petition together within one month. If the 2nd respondent is inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal, the 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on the stay petition as well. Till disposal of the stay petition, the coercive recovery proceedings shall shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/