M KRISHNADAS Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by Ext.P1 order of assessment the petitioner had filed first appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. Ext.P2 is the appellate order issued by that authority. Being aggrieved by Ext.P2, the petitioner had preferred further appeal before the second respondent Tribunal as evidenced from Ext.P3. Ext.P4 is the stay petition filed along with the appeal. It is stated that Ext.P3 appeal as well as the stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before the second respondent Tribunal. Grievance of the petitioner is that now the 3rd respondent had initiated coercive steps of recovery, without considering pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal.

(2.) HEARD, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents. Considering pendency of the appeal before the second respondent Tribunal, I am of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of directing that Tribunal to have an expedious consideration of the matter.

(3.) THE petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent.