IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 32625 of 2009(W) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- MESSRS.WIRELESS TT INFO SERVICES LTD., ROOM NO.1 TO 5, SL PLAZA, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-682 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY J.D. SUDEVAN BY ADV. MR.A.KUMAR MS.G.MINI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECKPOST, ARYANKAVU P.O., KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ================== WP (C).No. 32625 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 16th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T 1. The petitioner is a Public Limited Company providing infrastructure facility for telecom service providers. The petitioner is aggrieved by detention of a consignment of 'tower parts' purchased inter-state, on payment of reduced rate of Central Sales Tax (CST) at 2%. According to the petitioner, the transport was effected on the basis of Tax Invoice, Delivery Challan and Way Bill. The respondent intercepted the transport on issuing Ext.P5 notice, under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act 2003 (KVAT Act 2003). The reasons stated for detention is that the consignee is not authorised to deal with the items under transport in inter-state transaction, because those items are not covered under their CST registration. It is further pointed out that the consignment was not accompanied by the original or transporter copy of the invoice. Therefore, genuineness of the transport and thereby attempt at evasion of payment of tax is suspected. -2- 2. According to the petitioner their CST registration certificate was covering 84 items of telecommunication equipments and they have produced copy of the registration certificate as per Ext.P1. It is further stated that immediately on detention, the petitioner had produced original as well as the transporter copy of the invoice and other documents. 3. Learned Government Pleader contended that the detention was for want of original documents and after the detention no responsible person of petitioner had contacted the respondent. 4. However, the question regarding imposition of penalty under Section 47 need be adjudicated and decided by the competent authority. I am of the opinion that pending finalisation of such adjudication, the goods can be released on the basis of proper security. -3- 5. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent to release the goods along with the vehicle, detained under Ext.P5 notice, on the petitioner producing original as well as transporter copy of the invoice and other documents accompanying the transport. The petitioner shall also furnish security bond in the format provided under the KVAT Rules, for the value demanded under Ext.P5, without sureties. 6. The competent authority under Section 47 of the KVAT Act 2003 is directed to finalise the adjudication proceedings after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of 2 months from the date of release of goods. C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE nl