IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 1ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29224 of 2010(C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ VOLVO AUTO INDIA LIMITED, CC NO.62/2450A, 2ND FLOOR ,EMIR PLAZA, KALOOR-KATHRIKADAVU ROAD, KOCHI-17, REPRESENTED BY ITS COSTOMER SERVICES DEVELOPMENT MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SHAJI MATHEW. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER, SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.V, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM- 682 015. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE-I, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM- 682 015. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM- 682 015. 4. OMEGA MOTORS PVT.LTD., MGF BUILDING, MATTANCHERRY HALT, MATSYAPURI PO, WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI-3. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 29224 OF 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner M/s. Volvo Auto India Limited had imported two volvo cars Model XC 90 from Sweden, for the purpose of demonstration at the place of various dealers spread over in different parts of the country. One car was imported in August 2008 and another car was imported in February 2010. The cars were sent to various places for demonstration and lastly it was with one of the dealers, M/s. Omega Motors Pvt. Ltd., at Wellington Island. One of the cars were transported from the place of the said dealer to the yard owned by the petitioner at Eloor. The transport was intercepted by the first respondent on issuing Ext.P7 notice under Section 47 (2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. 2. The reason for detention noted in Ext.P7 is that no documents were accompanying with the transport. The petitioner had produced Ext.P1 Bill of Entry and Exts.P1(a) and P2(a) chalans evidencing payment of import duty. According to the petitioner the goods were transported on the basis of Delivery Note, Ext.P6 and Declaration issued by the petitioner regarding ownership. 3. It is contended by the petitioner that the vehicle in question detained under Ext.P7 was not intended for sale and the same was imported only for the purpose of demonstration. The transport was genuine 2 WP(C) No. 29224/2010 and it was made only from the place of the dealer to the yard of the petitioner at Eloor. It is further contended that the valuation adopted by the first respondent at Rs. 1 crore is not true. Ext.P8 invoice is produced to show that the value of that model vehicle is only an amount of Rs.39 lakhs. It is contended that the petitioner is a registered dealer who is regularly paying tax. 4. Learned Government Pleader, on the basis of the instructions, submitted that the goods were detained suspecting genuineness of the transport since no documents were accompanying along with the transport. The question to be decided, as to whether there was any attempt of evasion in payment of tax, is a matter for enquiry as contemplated under Section 47. I am of the opinion that the goods and the vehicle in which it was carried need not be detained till finalization of the enquiry. 5. Under the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to release the goods detained under Ext.P7, along with the vehicle, on the petitioner furnishing Security Bond as provided under KVAT Rules, without sureties. 6. The competent authority is directed to finalise the enquiry after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner at the earliest as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of release of the goods. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc