IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33519 of 2010(L) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ANWAR.C.M, SAFA MAHAL, HOUSE NO.60/226, ST.FRANCIS ROAD, KATHRIKADAVU, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 017. BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.VARGHESE, SRI.SHAHUL HAMEED MOOPPAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KVAT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM-682 013. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT, IV CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM-682 013. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 33519 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 4th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Ext.P3 is the order of assessment completed against the petitioner for the year 2009-'10, under section 25 (1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). Aggrieved by Ex.P3, the petitioner had preferred statutory appeal before the 1st respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P5. Along with the appeal, the petitioner had preferred Exts.P6 petition for stay and P7 petition for early hearing of the appeal. It is submitted that the appeal and stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before the 1st respondent. 2. By Ext.P9 order, the request made by the petitioner for refund of an amount of Rs.77,048/-, pertaining to the very same assessment year, was rejected. Aggrieved by Ext.P9, the petitioner had also preferred statutory appeal before the 1st respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P10. It is submitted that Ext.P10 is pending consideration and disposal before the 1st respondent. 3. Grievance of the petitioner is that without considering W.P.(C) No. 33519/2010 2 pendency of the appeals and the petitions, recovery steps are being pursued, on issuing Ext.P4 demand notice. Therefore the petitioner seeks for a direction to restrain the recovery steps till the disposal of the appeals. 4. Considering pendency of the statutory appeals before the 1st respondent, I am of the view that writ petition can be disposed of directing the 1st respondent to expedite the matter. 5. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 stay petition filed along with Ext.P5 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest possible. While considering the stay petition, the 1st respondent shall also take note of Ext.P9 order and Ext.P10 appeal. 6. Till such time orders are passed by the 1st respondent as directed above, recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P3 order shall be kept in abeyance. 7. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.