ATIR AMAHMOOD, J.---The grievance of the petitioner is that his appeal is pending before respondent No,2 and has not come up for hearing as yet. Learned counsel states that during the pendency of his appeal, impugned notices dated 10-6-2014 and 8-7-2014 for the recovery of tax demand of Rs,1,826,032 have been served upon the petitioner. He states that he does not. press this petition and would be satisfied if a direction is given to respondent No,3 to decide the appeal of the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously. In this regard, he has relied upon the cases titled Central Board of Revenue v. Chanda Motors (1993 SCM R 39) and Sun Rise Bottling Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. v.Federation of Pakistan (2006 PTD 535).
2. The request of the learned counsel for the petitioner is tenable. The law laid down in a case titled Central Board of Revenue v. Chanda Motors (1993 SCM R 39) is that:-- "It is well-settled that when an appeal is filed against an assessment order before the AAC, the assessm ent is thrown open and the appellate proceeding constitutes a continuation of the assessm ent proceedings."
In the case titled Sun Rise Bottling Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan (2006 PTD 535) it was held that:-- "It is directed that the respondent No,5 shall not press for recovery of the impugned dues from the petitioner who shall appear before the learned Appellate Tribunal through an appropriate application seeking final adjudication of the pending appeal."
Therefore, until finally deciding the appeal, the respondents cannot recover the amount from the petitioner. Respondent No,3 is directed to decide the pending appeal of the petitioner in accordance with law through a speaking order after hearing all the necessary parties within 30 days of receipt of certified copy of this order. However, till such time that the appeal is decided, the recovery notices shall remain suspended. Compliance report shall be submitted to the Deputy Registrar (Judy.) of this Court. Disposed of.
3. Copy Dasti.