IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31100 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S. VRUNDAVAN SALES DEPOT, 3/2505, MAJEED GODOWN, NORTH BEACH ROAD, VELLAYIL, NADAKKAVE, KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SHYJU K. BY ADV. SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT: --------------- THE INTELLEGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.III, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES AT MINI CIVIL STATION ERINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2009/, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kk/ C.K. ABDUL RAHIM, J. -------------------------- WP(C) NO. 31100 OF 2009 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009 JUDGMENT ------------- The petitioner is aggrieved by detention of transport effected from their branch office at Aluva to their principal place of business at Calicut. According to the petitioner, the transport was accompanied by Ext.P2 branch transfer invoice. Petitioner had also produced Ext.P4 delivery note before the respondent. The detention was effected on issuing Ext.P5 notice under section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax (K.V.A.T Act 2003). The reason for detention mentioned therein is that the delivery note was not accompanying along with the transport and the invoice which was available does not revealed any tax collection. 2. According to the petitioner he is a registered dealer regularly paying the tax, and the consignment in question is with respect to branch transfer, and it was a bonafide and genuine transport. There is no attempt to evade tax as alleged, is the contention. 3. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Having considering the fact that the petitioner is a registered dealer and it is only a WP(C) NO. 31100 OF 2009 2 branch transfer accompanied by invoice, I am of the opinion that pending finalization of adjudication under Section 47 of the Act, the goods can be released on furnishing security bond as provided under the proviso to Section 47(2). 4. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to release the goods along with the vehicle which is detained under Ext.P5 notice, on condition of the petitioner furnishing a security bond without sureties in the form provided under K.V.A.T. Rules for the value of security deposit demanded under Ext.P5. 5. The competent authority under Section 47(5) & (6) of the Act is directed to expadite the adjudication proceedings and to finalize the same after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of release of goods. C.K. ABDUL RAHIM JUDGE pkk WP(C) NO. 31100 OF 2009 3 pkk