The petitioner is aggrieved by the conditional order passed, as is evidenced from Exhibit P7. The petitioner, for the assessment year 2008-09, challenged the assessment order before the first appellate authority, in which the above conditional order was passed. In fact, earlier in the relevant year on detection of an offence, penalty proceedings were initiated and penalty was imposed, as per Exhibit P1. The same was appealed against and as an interim measure, the petitioner was directed to pay one-third of the penalty demanded, as evidenced by Exhibit P2. The petitioner has satisfied the same by Exhibit P3. Subsequently, the appeal filed by the petitioner against the penalty order has been allowed by Exhibit P4. 2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner's assessment proceedings were concluded, taking into account the above penalty also, against which the present Exhibit P6 appeal is filed along with a stay petition, in which Exhibit P7 order was passed. In WP(C).No.14915 of 2014 - 2 -
the circumstance of the petitioner having paid almost Rs.1,00,000/- and the total demand now raised as per the assessment order being slightly more than Rs.1 lakh, it is deemed fit and proper that the petitioner's appeal is considered expeditiously and the recovery proceedings kept in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal. I direct so. Exhibit P7 order is set aside.
Writ petition allowed. No costs.
vku/-
K.Vinod Chandran Judge.
//true copy// P.S to Judge