|COURT:||Kerala High Court|
|CORAM:||Dama Seshadri Naidu J|
|CATCH WORDS:||coercive recovery, stay of demand|
|DATE:||December 12, 2018 (Date of pronouncement)|
|DATE:||December 24, 2018 (Date of publication)|
|FILE:||Click here to download the file in pdf format|
|S. 220(6) Stay of demand: If the assessee has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing an appeal and also filed a stay petition, procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition|
The petitioner, a Co-Operative Society registered under the Kerala State Societies Act, questioned the Exts.P5 and P6 orders and Ext.P7 demand notice, before the 4th respondent.
The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating its grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that it has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.
Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 4th respondent considers the stay petition.
I also hope that the 4th respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.
Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE