' NOOR-UL-HAQ N. QURESHI, J. --- It is contended that appeal alongwith stay, application against order dated 15.05.2014 passed by Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-II), Islamabad was preferred before respondent No. 4, which has been reserved for judgment. Respondent No. 4 had already granted stay for 180-days and it cannot be extended beyond that under the law. It is apprehended that in case, when respondent No. 2 cannot grant further stay and appeal is reserved for judgment, respondent No. 2 may start recovery proceedings, which will be against the principle of natural justice.
2. Learned counsel has agreed to the disposal of instant writ petition provided a direction be issued to respondent No. 4 for expeditious disposal of appeal filed by the petitioner coupled with stay, of recovery proceedings.
3. In view of above, respondent No. 4 is directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner company within 30-days. Till then, recovery proceedings shall not be initiated.
4. This order shall cease to exist automatically after expiry of 30-days from today or till decision of appeal by respondent No. 4, whichever is earlier.
5. With above direction, writ petition stands disposed of. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.