IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34888 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD., VI/245-A, KUNNATHUPEEDIKA, KOTTEKKAD, THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS SENIOR LEGAL EXECUTIVE SMT.JANANI NATARAJAN. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.NIVEDITHA A KAMATH RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, (COMMERCIAL TAXES), NEYYATTINKARA CHECK POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, (COMMERCIAL TAXES), SPECIAL CIRCLE, MATTANCHERRY AT ALUVA. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.34888 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- A consignment of wheat flour along with chilly powder and other condiments transported by the petitioner from the clearing and forwarding agent at Thrissur, meant for distribution to various dealers at Thiruvananthapuram, was detained by the 1st respondent on issuing notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act), as per Ext.P1. Considering the urgency in getting release of the goods, the petitioner remitted the security deposit demanded and the goods in question were released pending finalisation of enquiry, as evidenced from Ext.P4 proceedings. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that, in spite of release of the goods on 27.10.2010, the authority concerned is not taking any effective steps to finalise the enquiry as contemplated under Section 47(5) and (6) of the KVAT Act and the amount of security deposit made by the petitioner is W.P.(C).34888/10-I -2- not refunded. Therefore the petitioner seeks appropriate direction to the 1st respondent to finalise the matter within a time limit to be stipulated. 3. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Having considered facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 1st respondent to finalise the enquiry at an early basis. 4. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and finalise the enquiry contemplated under Section 47(5) and (6), pursuant to Ext.P1 and P4 proceedings, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb