Challenging Ext.P3 assessment order passed by the 1st respondent, the petitioner has moved the 2nd respondent by way of Ext.P4 appeal, along with Ext.P5 petition for stay. The grievance of the petitioner is mainly with regard to the coercive steps taken in the meanwhile as borne by Ext.P6 notice, which hence are sought to be intercepted by this Court.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that, in spite of submission of Ext.P2 reply before the 1st respondent, nothing has been discussed by the Assessing Authority while passing Ext.P3 order, but for making just a reference to the said reply. It is for the Appellate Authority to consider the said aspect as well, while considering the appeal as well as the petition for stay. Since the matter is pending before the 2nd respondent, this Court does not intend to express any opinion in this regard.
W.P.(C) No.31552 of 2014 2 The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5, at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of ‘one month’ from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for the time being.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 2nd respondent, for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp