The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value

Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1^st respondent,

questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order, before the 2^nd respondent.

He filed Ext.P2 statutory appeal along with a stay petition, besides a

delay condonation petition. The delay is said to be 64 days. The

petitioner complains that before the appellate forum could consider

his interlocutory applications, the respondent authority is taking

coercive steps.

2.

This Court, after hearing the learned counsel on either

side, disposes of this writ petition holding that the 2^nd respondent will

consider the interlocutory applications, including the delay

condonation petition, at the earliest and pass orders, possibly, within

one month.

The respondent authority shall defer coercive steps until the 2^nd

respondent considers the interlocutory applications.

Sd/-

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

JUDGE

das

-3-

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1

THE TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER

FOR THE YEAR 2013-2014 ISSUED BY THE

FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P2

THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM

NO.29 AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY

THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND

RESPONDENT AGAINS