IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2010 / 15TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24670 of 2010(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PONNU FOODS PRODUCTS,AILARA P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR, S.SUJA SHAJILAL. BY ADV. SRI.S.SHARAN SRI.A.D.SHAJAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.1,COMMERCIAL TAXES,NEETHI NAGAR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.24670 of 2010-G ---------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is before this Court aggrieved of the detention of the goods transported by the petitioner through 'Railways', issuing, Ext.P3 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the reasons shown in Ext.P3 for detention are not correct or sustainable and that the petitioner, though has offered explanation, as borne by Ext.P4, it has not been properly considered by the concerned respondent, who has issued Ext.P5 and the detention still continues, which made the petitioner to approach this Court seeking for immediate interference. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits with reference to the materials on record that, there is clear violation of relevant Rules, in so far as the requisite documents contemplated under Section 46(3) did not accompany W.P(C) No.24670 of 2010-G 2 the transport. Further, there is much difference with regard to the weight of the commodity transported and also the rate. It was in the said circumstances, that evasion of tax was doubted demanding security deposit vide Ext.P3, which is stated as within four walls of the law and not assailable under any circumstances. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to detain the goods any further and the same shall be released to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner satisfies 50% of the security deposit shown in Ext.P3, either by way of 'Bank Guarantee' or as 'cash' and executes a 'simple bond' in respect of the balance amount. On satisfying the said requirement, the goods shall be released to the petitioner forthwith. This will be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings, if any, which shall be finalised in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab