JUDGMENT

The petitioner in this case has approached this Court seeking to set aside Ext.P6 order passed by the 4th respondent, whereby the claim made by the petitioner to lift the attachment over the concerned property has been rejected, as not sustainable in law.

2. The sequence of events narrated in the writ petition shows that assessment was finalised in the case of the petitioner as per Exts.P1 and P2 orders dated 26.02.2011 for the assessment years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. The petitioner has availed the statutory remedy by filing the appeal. The property of the petitioner however came to be attached in the meanwhile. The petitioner has already satisfied the tax portion of the liability and the remaining dispute is only with regard to interest and such other amounts. The petitioner approached this Court earlier by filing WP(C) No.30125 of 2014, which was disposed of as per Ext.P5 judgment dated 13.11.2014, directing the Appellate Authority to pass final orders in the appeal, making it clear that coercive proceedings shall not be taken in the meanwhile. There was also a direction to the 4th respondent to consider the petition preferred by the petitioner for lifting the attachment