IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2009 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 8817 of 2009(V) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S.GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LTD,FREEDOM ROAD KALOOR REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, N.SANTHAKUMAR. BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAXES,SQUAD III, KOLLAM. 2. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER(ASSMT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, III CIRCLE,ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.8817 of 2009-V ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 20th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Exts.P1 and P2. Ext.P1 is a notice issued under Section 47 (2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. Ext.P2 is the objection filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is only a mistake and the challenge is against Ext.P3. Ext.P3 is the decision of the Intelligence Inspector, Kollam on Ext.P2 objection of the petitioner. 2. I heard Smt.S.K.Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. Goods were detained at Kollam at 10.40 P.M. on 14.3.2009. Reference is made to Ext.P1 statement of the driver. Petitioner relies on Exts. P5a and P6. I think that the correctness of the allegations are to be gone into in the adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has paid huge amounts as tax and there is no evasion of tax and she would also submit that it is a case where the goods which were detained originated from Cochin and is not goods WPC No. 8817/2009 -2- belonging to some manufacturer at Kollam. These are all matters to be gone into in the adjudication. I do not think that this is a case where I should direct release of goods on executing bond. However, if the petitioner executes bank guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P1 the goods will be released to the petitioner forthwith and adjudication shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The officer will take note of the hologram and seal on the Items before releasing the goods. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS