The petitioner is challenging the correctness and sustainability of the condition imposed by this Court, vide Ext. P10 order dated 04.09.2014, directing him to satisfy 30 % of the disputed liability so as to enjoy the benefit of interim stay during pendency of appeal.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had filed Ext.P1 return for the month of December 2011 and subsequently the offence levelled against the petitioner was sought to be compounded as borne by Ext. P2. In the course of further proceedings, the petitioner paid tax and such other amounts payable under the relevant provisions of law and filed revised return, as borne by Exts. P3/P3(a). In view of the said course and events, according to the petitioner, no further proceeding can be pursued against the petitioner; in spite of which, the first respondent mulcted huge liability upon the petitioner alleging some unaccounted purchase, as per Ext. P5. Being aggrieved of Ext. P5, the petitioner filed Ext. P6 W.P.(C) No. 30515 of 2014 : 2 :
appeal along with Ext. P7 petition for stay. In view of Exts. P8 and P8(a) series notices, the petitioner had approached this Court earlier, by filing W.P.(C) No. 18584 of 2014, which was disposed of as per Ext. P9, directing the appellate authority to consider I.A. for stay. It was accordingly that Ext. P10 order came to be passed, imposing the condition as aforesaid.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, but for referring to the contentions raised by the petitioner, absolutely no reason has been stated in Ext. P10 order.
5. Going by the contents of Ext. P10 order, it is seen that said order has been passed without proper discussion or application of mind. In the said circumstances, this Court finds that the matter requires to be reconsidered. Accordingly, Ext. P10 stands set aside. The second respondent is directed to reconsider Ext. P7 stay petition and to pass a speaking order, as directed vide Ext. P9 judgment. The proceedings as above shall be finalized, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings, if any, shall be kept in abeyance till such time.
W.P.(C) No. 30515 of 2014 : 3 :
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for further steps.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
kmd Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)