IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 4TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25453 of 2011(F) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THANOOJA ENTERPRISES, KEECHERI, PAPPINISSERY P.O., ANJAMPEEDIKA ROAD, KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE SMT.B.BINDU SMT.N.DEEPA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THE KERALA VALU ADDED TAX, ERNAKULAM. PIN - 682 018. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX, KOZHIKODE-673001. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, 2ND CIRCLE, KANNUR-670001. 4. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, 2ND CIRCLE, KANNUR-670001. ADV. SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN - GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 25453 of 2011(F) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.32120272552/2008-09 DATED 06.11.2010 OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXEX, 2ND CIRCLE,KANNUR. EXHIBIT-P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 03.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P3. A TRUE COY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.11311/2011 DATED 7/4/2011 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. EXHIBIT-P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN VAT APPEAL 150/2011 DATED 26/5/2011 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-5. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AS T.A.(VAT) NO.1025/2011/. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 25453 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner having been unsuccessful in the first appeal against the assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, filed Ext.P5 second appeal before the 1st respondent Appellate Tribunal, along with an application for stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner seeks disposal of the stay application and stay in the meanwhile. 2. This is opposed by the learned Government Pleader, who submits that the petitioner has already lost in the first appeal and therefore, there is no ground for grant of stay. 3. Whether the petitioner is entitled to stay or not, the petitioner is certainly entitled to have their stay petition considered within a reasonable time. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the stay W.P.(C)No.25453/11 2 application accompanying Ext.P5 appeal, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.25453/11 3