JUDGMENT : V.K. Bist, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: “(i) a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned recovery proceedings and citation dated 6-6-2016 issued by Tehsildar Ranikhet District Almora (annexure-1) for recovery of Rs. 4,20,000/-and interest from petitioner as outstanding dues of alleged commercial tax.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner, namely, M/s Vikuj Developers Pvt. Ltd. is a registered company, registered in the State of Delhi under the Company Registration Act, having its registered office 218-A, Devika Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi. The petitioner is the owner of land, measuring approximately 37 Nali, situated at Village Chaukhoni, Ranikhet District Almora through sale deed executed by its earlier owners during the period November, 2009 till 2012. Out of the total land, approximately 12 Nali land has been sold by the petitioner to different people. It is alleged that, at the time of purchase of the land, the petitioner has paid the government revenue by paying stamp duty on the value of the land. On the aforesaid land, four towers were built comprising of about 24 Apartments and all Apartments have been sold and registered to their new owners. According to the petitioner, at the time of selling of the aforesaid Apartments, the Government Revenue was also paid according to the valuations. On 06.06.2016, a recovery citation has been issued by Tehsildar, Ranikhet for recovery of Commercial Tax amounting Rs. 4,20,000/-+ Interest, which was pasted on the premises of petitioner land situated at Village Chaukhoni, Tehsil Ranikhet, District Almora. Hence, this writ petition. 3. It is the case of the learned counsel for the petitioner that recovery citation has been issued against the petitioner without any reason. He submitted that the petitioner was not served with the said notice and, therefore, he could not appear. He submitted that had the petitioner received the said notice, he would certainly have put in appearance before the respondents. He argued that ex-parte order has been passed by the respondents against the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel was asked to inquire about the matter. He has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 3. In the short counter affidavit, it is stated that petitioner M/s Vikuj Developers Pvt. Ltd. is a registered dealer with the Commercial Tax Department and its registration number is 05012152961. 4. Learned Standing Counsel was asked to inquire about the matter. He has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 3. In the short counter affidavit, it is stated that petitioner M/s Vikuj Developers Pvt. Ltd. is a registered dealer with the Commercial Tax Department and its registration number is 05012152961. The petitioner raised apartments, namely, Royal Pine Apartments at Village Chaukhoni, Tehsil Ranikhet, District Almora. It is stated that petitioner is a registered dealer, therefore, in terms of Section 23 (4) of the Uttaranchal Value Added Tax Act, he is duty bound to submit the periodical returns, but the same was not done at the end of the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner was sent notices, requiring his presence before the authority alongwith all the relevant documents and details. Despite the sending of the notices to the petitioner, he failed to turn up before the authority. When no one turned up from the end of the petitioner, final assessment order under Section 25(7) of the Uttaranchal Value Added Tax was passed by the Commercial Tax Officer imposing a tax liability of Rs. 4,20,000/-on the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that, since the recovery proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner in pursuance of assessment order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, the petitioner is proposing to file an Appeal before the Commissioner Trade Tax against the said order and wants to withdraw this writ petition. He prayed that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file an Appeal before the Commissioner Trade Tax. He also prayed that direction may be issued to the respondents not to take coercive measures against the petitioner. 6. Since the petitioner is being permitted to withdraw this writ petition, no direction, as prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, can be passed by this Court. 7. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file an Appeal alongwith Delay Condonation Application before the Commissioner Trade Tax. The Commissioner Trade Tax will consider the Delay Condonation Application sympathetically, if law permits.