IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 30TH AUGUST 2010 / 8TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26983 of 2010(W) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S.OIL AND GAS PLANT ENGINEERS (INDIA) PVT LTD., 23/48, ARDRA, PALLIPURAM, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, VIVEK MADAN. BY ADVS. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WC), COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682 015. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 678 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/08/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.26983 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment issued under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (the Act for short), pertaining to the year 2008-09, the petitioner had preferred appeal before the 2nd respondent as evidenced from Ext.P2. The appeal was filed along with Ext.P3 petition seeking condonation of delay. Petitioner has also filed Ext.P4 stay petition. It is submitted that the appellate authority has not considered the appeal or the accompanying applications. Grievance of the petitioner is that coercive steps of recovery are now being threatened pursuant to Ext.P6 notice. 2. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering circumstances attendant on this case, I am of the opinion that the appellate authority can be directed to W.P.(C).26983 of 2010 -2- deal with the matter on an early basis. 3. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 application filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. If the delay in filing the appeal is condoned, the 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on stay applications (Ext.P4), simultaneously. Till such time orders are passed as directed above all further steps of recovery initiated pursuant to Ext.P6 notice shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb