J.V. GOLD Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, is aggrieved by Ext.P4 proceedings of the Assistant Commissioner (Appeals), Thrissur, by which the assessing authority was directed to modify and issue assessment order. Pursuant to Ext.P4, Ext.P5 proceedings have been issued by the State Tax Officer, Fourth Circle, Thrissur indicating that the balance interest due is 5,63,305/-. The petitioner proposes to challenge Exts.P4 and P5 before the appropriate appellate authority. In the meanwhile, the 3 rd respondent has initiated Revenue Recovery Proceedings as per Ext.P6. The petitioner contends that unless the petitioner gets a breathing time to prefer appeal against Exts.P4 and P5 and in the mean while, if the 3rd respondent proceeds with Ext.P6, the petitioner, will be put to irreparable hardship and loss.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The petitioner had challenged the original assessment orders and had succeeded. The Exts.P4 and P5 have been passed subsequently. Ext.P5 order is dated 23.10.2019. In the circumstances, if the 3rd respondent is permitted to proceed with Ext.P6 Revenue Recovery Proceedings before the petitioner can avail the appellate remedy, petitioner will be put in difficulty.

(3.) In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of granting the petitioner a time of two weeks from today to prefer appeal against Exts.P4 and P5. Ext.P6 Revenue Recovery Proceedings will stand deferred for a period of four weeks, to enable the petitioner to invoke appellate remedy.