Being aggrieved of rejection of Exts.P1 series assessment orders passed by the second respondent, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P5 series second appeals before the first respondent, which are pending consideration. The grievance of the petitioner is that without any regard to the pendency of the above proceedings, the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps, as borne by Ext.P6 notice, which hence is sought to be intercepted by this Court.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had already satisfied 1/3rd of the liability in the first round of appeal. This being the position, there is no rhyme or reason to pass Ext.P8 order imposing a condition upon the petitioner. There is also grievance for the petitioner that the request made by the petitioner vide Exts.P2 to P4 for returning the documents has not been considered by the concerned respondent.
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that, the WP(c). No.29727 of 2014 2 merit of the case has already been considered and adjudicated by the authorities at two different levels ie, the original authority as well as the first appellate authority. After considering the facts and figures, the Tribunal imposed the condition vide Ext.P8, which cannot be termed as illegal in any manner. It is also stated that, the concerned respondent does not have any objection in returning the records, which will be done forthwith, at any rate within 'two weeks'.
4. The above submission is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of, granting a further period of 'two weeks' to satisfy the condition imposed by the Tribunal as per Ext.P8, subject to which the petitioner will continue to enjoy the benefit of interim stay during pendency of the appeal. The appeal shall be considered and finalised by the Tribunal, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Pn