IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24959 of 2010(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S. ATHENS CORPORATION, 44/2947, DESABHIMANI ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, JOSEPH C SIMON AGED 35 YEARS,DA 6, SIVADAS TOWERS, CHITTOOR ROAD COCHIN-18 BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER INTELLIGENCE INSPECTION SQUAD NO.III COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUTHIYATHODU POLICE STATION. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 24959 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 10th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT Goods transported by the petitioner in the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-7K-5423 were intercepted on 6- 8-2010, issuing Ext.P2 notice under the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax, demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein, which is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no rhyme or reason for detaining the goods as well as the vehicle, in so far as it is nothing but an 'in-house transfer' and that there is no attempt to evade tax under any circumstances. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Going by the contents of the writ petition, it is seen that there is no case of the petitioner that the insinuating circumstances pointing out in Ext.P2 are wrong. No statement of objection is also stated as submitted in this regard. W.P.(C) No. 24959/2010 2 5. In any view of the matter, since there is prima facie violation of Rule 58(16) of the KVAT Act, the matter requires to be adjudicated by the competent authority in accordance with the relevant provisions of the law. But, for that matter, this Court does not find it necessary to detain the goods as well as the vehicle any further. The same shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, on condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the security deposit demanded in Ext.P2 and furnishes a 'simple bond' for the balance amount. This will be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings, if any, in accordance with the relevant provisions of law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. mn.