IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 

W.P(C) No. 23701 of 2011 (K)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 

Dated this, the 1st day of September, 2011

1. VISHRAAM BUILDERS,MOOKAMBIKA APARTMENT, ... Petitioner

Vs

1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,

... Respondent

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)

3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, 

For Petitioner :SRI.V.V.ASOKAN

For Respondent : No Appearance

J U D G M E N T

Against Ext. P2 penalty order, the petitioner has filed Ext. P3 appeal along with Exts. P3(a) petition for stay of recovery proceedings and Ext. P3(b) petition to condone the delay in filing the appeal. 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 appeal, the appellate authority cannot consider the stay petition without first considering the petition 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/