Coercive recovery stayed in effect while appellate tribunal was directed to decide the pending stay application promptly.

Coercive recovery during pendency of a statutory appeal and stay application was not finally examined on the merits; instead, the Karnataka HC directed the appellate tribunal to decide the stay request expeditiously and to advance the appeal hearing. Recovery notices issued to third parties under the VAT Act were left subject to the tribunal's further order, including whether stay should be granted unconditionally or on deposit terms. The court considered that the ends of justice were served by urgent appellate consideration rather than immediate adjudication of the recovery action.

---

---

Issues: Whether coercive recovery could be interfered with when the statutory appeal and stay application were already pending before the appellate tribunal, and whether the tribunal should be directed to decide the stay request expeditiously.

Analysis: The reassessment order had been appealed against promptly, the stay application was pending, and recovery notices had meanwhile been issued to third parties under the VAT Act. In these circumstances, the Court found that the ends of justice would be served by ensuring an early decision on the stay application and by advancing the appeal hearing. Any amount received or retained pursuant to the recovery notices was made subject to the tribunal's further order, including whether stay should be unconditional or conditional on deposit.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not adjudicated on the merits of the recovery action; instead, the matter was left to the appellate tribunal for urgent consideration of stay and further orders.

---