Vichus Constructions And Hotels Private Limitedflat v. Jose

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2019 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1941 WP(C).No.17777 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: VICHUS CONSTRUCTIONS AND HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITEDFLAT NO.2A, 2ND FLOOR, GOLDEN METRO APTS, NEAR PETTAH BRIDGE, TRIPUNITHURA - 682 301. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SHRI K. V. JOSE BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT/S: SRI JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeals in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Exts.P1 made under Section 25(1) ofthe KVAT Act. The petitioner prays for appropriate directionto the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P3stay petition expeditiously. 2.The case of petitioner is that either the mere filingof appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount togranting stay by the assessing authority. The delay inconsidering and disposing of Exts. P3 stay petition results inthe assessing officer taking steps for recovering the taxamount which is under challenge in Ext.P2 appeal. Theassessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutoryappeal would become either academic or ineffective. It isfurther contended by the petitioner that in the manner thelaw provides for protecting the interest of appellant pendingappeal, the orders on stay petition is passed expeditiously.Hence the writ petition. 3.Perused Ext.P1 assessment order, Exts.P2 appeal and Exts.P3 stay petition. Prima facie, I am satisfied that acase is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2[nd]respondent to dispose of the stay petition in Ext.P3 staypetition. Having regard to the limited prayer and the groundsreferred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petitioncan be disposed of by this order: (a)The appellate authority/2[nd] respondent considersand disposes of Ext.P3 stay applications as early aspossible, preferably within two months from the date ofreceipt of copy of this judgment. (b)The respondents are directed not to take coercivesteps or recover the amounts determined in the ordersunder appeal for ten weeks from today. The respondents are directed not to take coercive Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 31.1.2019 AGAINST EXT.P1. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26.6.2019.