IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20312 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.BALAKRISHNAN, NO.115-B, SOUTH STREET-7, AVARAMPALAYAM, COIMBATORE-6. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE INSPCTOR, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.1, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.1, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. 4. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 20312 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing the notice Ext.P10, and release the goods detained as per the said notice to this petitioner after collecting the appropriate security deposit under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act. b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order directing the 1st respondent to drop all further proceedings pertaining to the impugned notice and release the materials detained to this petitioner after collecting the security deposit as envisaged in Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the proceedings being pursued by the respondents are without any regard to the actual facts and circumstances; under which the goods happened to be transported into the State. The petitioner is a resident at Coimbatore in Tamilnadu; where he is doing some business and is not a registered dealer under KVAT Act/Rules. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was transporting some miniature welding sets and water pumps in the border place near Coimbatore and the materials were loaded in the concerned truck to be given to the prospective purchasers near Chavadi and elsewhere. Some other materials belonging to others were also loaded in the very same vehicle to be taken to Kollam 2 WP(C) No. 20312/2010 and Thiruvananthapuram and the vehicle proceeded to the said destination without unloading the goods of the petitioner; by mistake. It was while so, the vehicle and the goods were intercepted by the 1st respondent on the way, leading to issuance of impugned notices and proceedings. 3. The learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that, the materials were being transported absolutely without any documents and on issuance of Ext.P7 notice, the RC owner of the vehicle appeared and conceded the position to get release of the vehicle effecting the payment to the requisite extent. Further steps were pursued by issuing Ext.P10 notice, for causing the goods to be sold in public auction; when the petitioner submitted Ext.P11 'e-mail' seeking for further time to file proper reply. Thereafter Ext.P15 explanation was submitted by the petitioner, based on which; Ext.P16 notice was issued, giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and asking him to appear in person with the relevant documents on 24.06.2010. The learned Government Pleader submits that, in spite of the service of notice as above, the petitioner did not turn up, but sent another 'e-mail' as borne by Ext.P17, stating that the petitioner did not have any documents to substantiate the position and that the contention of the petitioner has already been highlighted in Ext.P15 explanation; which is sought to be finalized. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the 3 WP(C) No. 20312/2010 petitioner, however, will appear before the 1st respondent for the personal hearing on 14.07.2010 (as suggested by both the sides) at 11 O’ clock. The proceedings shall be finalized after hearing the petitioner or his representative and the proceedings shall be taken to a logical conclusion, by passing final orders as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc