Being aggrieved of Ext. P2 assessment order passed by the first respondent for the assessment years 2010 - '11, the petitioner has already preferred Ext. P3 appeal along with Ext. P3(a) interlocutory application for stay, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. Because of the coercive proceedings, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court.
2. Heard the learned standing counsel for the respondent as well, who points out that the petitioner had already approached the assessing authority by filing application under Section 220 (6) of the Income Tax Act and that Ext. P4 order came to be passed as early as on 25.06.2014, directing the petitioner to clear the liability as mentioned therein. It is stated that the petitioner has not complied with the said direction.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not make any observation with regard to the course and events pursued by the petitioner in so far as the petitioner is having right of appeal W.P.(C) No. 30024 of 2014 : 2 :
against Ext. P2 order and has filed Ext. P3 appeal along with Ext. P3(a) petition for stay, which in fact are to be considered by the appellate authority/second respondent. It is open for the second respondent to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In the said circumstances, there will be a direction to the second respondent to pass appropriate orders on Ext. P3(a) petition for stay, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance, till such time.
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)