R.K. DEVELOPERS Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed recovery notice dated 3-6-2014, 6-6-2014 and 11-6-2014 (Annexures-C, E and F). Briefly stated, the facts are that the petitioner being aggrieved by the order of assessment made by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), has filed an appeal before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)-second respondent herein. It is stated that the appeal has been heard and the matter has been reserved for orders on 8-9-2013. Thereafter, neither has the order been passed nor has any date with regard to further proceedings had been notified. In the interregnum, the impugned endorsement has been issued against the petitioner and that there is a threat of attachment of the bank account of the petitioner. Under the circumstances, the petitioner has assailed Annexures-C, E and F.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Additional Government Advocate, who appears on advance notice on behalf of the respondents and perused the material on record.

(3.) It is noted that the impugned notices and endorsement have been issued pursuant to the Assessment Order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), which is the subject-matter of appeal, before the second respondent. As the Appellate Authority is yet to take decision in the matter and that since 18-9-2013, the matter is pending without orders passed thereon, the petitioner must be given an opportunity to seek protective orders against enforcement of the impugned endorsement and notices, before the Appellate Authority, rather before this Court, in view of the pendency of the appeal before the second respondent-Appellate Authority.