Wp(C)/16905/2009 Of Shri. K.v. Kunhikannan v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kasargod

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16905 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SHRI.K.V.KUNHIKANNAN, PROPRIETOR, BINDU JEWELLERY, COURT ROAD, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. MR. T.M.SREEDHARAN MS. C.K.SHERIN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KASARAGOD. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-1. BY ADV. MR. JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 16905 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 18[th] day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Challenging Ext.P1 order imposing penalty upon the petitioner,he has preferred Ext.P2 memorandum of appeal along with Ext.P3petition for stay before the second respondent. The case of thepetitioner is that, it is without any regard to the pendency of the aboveproceedings that the respondents are proceeding with the coercivesteps, which in turn is sought to be intercepted by filing the above WritPetition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. Considering the facts and figures, the second respondent ishereby directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2appeal and Ext. P3 petition for stay in accordance with law, asexpeditiously as possible. However, it is made clear that tillappropriate orders are passed on Ext.P3 petition for stay, all furthercoercive proceedings, stated as being pursued against the petitioner,shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. kmd P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE