Ext.P1 assessment order passed by the first respondent/Commercial Tax Officer is under challenge before the second respondent/Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) by way of Ext.P2 appeal. The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext.P3 demand notice .
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not file any interlocutory application for stay under the bonafide impression that the appeal will be finalised without delay. However, in view of the coercive steps, the learned Counsel submits that the petitioner is ready to file an I.A. for stay within 'two weeks' and in the said circumstance, the prayer is to cause the same to be considered and finalised within a reasonable time
4. The learned Government Pleader submits that quite a lot of appeals are pending consideration before the second respondent and as such there is no sustainable reason to give an W.P.(C)No.27439 OF 2014 2 out of turn hearing to the petitioner .
5. In the above circumstance, the petitioner is set at liberty to file an interlocutory application for stay, if so advised, which shall be done within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. On such an event, the second respondent/Deputy Commissioner shall consider and pass appropriate orders in the I.A. for stay, within one month thereafter. Coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance till such time. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for further steps.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE lk