IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2010 / 10TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20415 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.RANI TRAVELS, NORTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682018, A REGD. PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI.MILTON LOPEZ. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER(INT.), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MUSEUM BUILDING, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 20415 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is an operator of contract carriages, sought to transport certain goods (seats and upholstery materials) which were intercepted on the way, leading to issuance of notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, which was subjected to challenge earlier by this Court in WP(C) No.19560/2010; leading to Ext.P2 judgment. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the goods were brought by the petitioner for 'own use'. Reliance was placed on the temporary permits produced as Exts.P3 and P3(a) in the said case [Exts.P8 and P8(a) in the present case]. It was rather conceded that, absolutely no document whatsoever was accompanying the transport and it was in the said circumstance that, an enquiry was sought to be conducted by the petitioner himself; thus leading to Ext.P2 judgment. 3. Pursuant to Ext.P2 judgment, the petitioner appeared before the concerned respondent for enquiry. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, all the requisite materials so as to substantiate the case were also produced; in spite of which, Ext.P1 order has been passed on 28.06.2010 against the petitioner. This in turn is now sought to be set aside in this Writ Petition, simultaneously praying for a direction to be issued to the 3rd 2 WP(C) No. 20415/2010 respondent to conduct and complete the enquiry under Section 47(6) of the Act. 4. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that, the Ext.P1 enquiry was conducted, based on the requisition made by the petitioner before this Court, inviting Ext.P2 judgment. It is further stated that, in the course of enquiry, certain other serious incriminating circumstances were also brought to light as discussed in Ext.P1 order itself. The petitioner was required to furnish security deposit of Rs.75,950/-, to release the goods, without prejudice to the rights of the party to pursue the adjudication proceedings. 5. After hearing the rival submissions, this Court finds that, the matter requires to be adjudicated as provided under the relevant provisions of the statute. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to finalise the proceedings pursuant to Exts.P3 notice, which shall be finalised in accordance with law, of course, after hearing the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The goods shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, on condition that, the petitioner satisfies the security deposit either in the form of 'Cash' or in the form of 'Bank Guarantee'. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc