Coercive recovery cannot proceed after a stay petition is allowed and the matter is remanded for fresh adjudication.

Coercive recovery and attachment should not be pursued once a Tribunal has orally allowed a stay petition and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. The text states that, after the departmental authorities were informed of the open-court order, recovery proceedings ought not to have continued by coercive measures. It also reflects the settled principle that coercive recovery should not be initiated while a stay petition is pending before a higher forum. The authorities were directed not to commence any coercive action against the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revenue authorities could continue or initiate coercive recovery and attachment proceedings against the appellant after the Tribunal had orally allowed the stay petition and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The order records that the Tribunal had already pronounced in open court allowing the stay petition and remanding the matter. It further notes that once the departmental authorities were informed of that outcome, recovery proceedings ought not to have been pursued by coercive measures. The order also refers to the settled principle that coercive recovery should not be initiated during the pendency of a stay petition before the higher forum.

Conclusion: The authorities were directed not to start any coercive action against the appellant.

---