IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2011 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30917 of 2011(L) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- RATHISH RAJU, KAMMATHIPADATHU HOUSE, KATHRIKADAVU, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-31. BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALIDHARAN (AROOR) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.II, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA. 2. M/S.METHODEX SYSTEMS LTD., 28/733-B, GROUND FLOOR, K.P.VALLON ROAD, COCHIN-20. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.30917/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE SALE INVOICE NO.KR/OP/12/0174 DATED 08.11.2011. P1(A):- COPY OF THE SALE INVOICE NO.KR/RS/12/0451 DATED 08.11.2011. P1(B):- COPY OF THE SALE INVOICE NO.KR/RS/12/0450 DATED 08.11.2011. P2:- COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC.47(2) BY THE IST RESPONDENT, DATED 10.11.2011. P3:- COPY OF THE BILL FROM SREE LAKSHMI AUTOMOBILES DATED 09.11.2011, FOR PAYMENT OF CHARGES FOR REPAIR OF TRUCK. P3(A):- COPY OF THE CASH BILL FOR PURCHASE OF SPARE PARTS FOR SERVICE OF VEHICLE DATED 08.11.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.30917 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 notice whereby on allegations of attempt to evade tax the petitioner has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs.62,070/- pending further proceedings as a condition for release of the vehicle and goods detained as per Ext.P2. The petitioner submits that, the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and the petitioner is not interested in the goods insofar as the respondents have not initiated any proceedings against the vehicle there cannot be any difficulty for releasing the vehicle alone after unloading the goods. 2. The learned Government Pleader opposes the prayers. But she submits that, if this court is inclined to direct release of the vehicle alone, the unloading shall be done at the expenses of the petitioner. 3. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: W.P.(C)No.30917 of 2011 -2- The petitioner shall get the goods unloaded at the expenses of the petitioner. On unloading of the goods, the 1st respondent shall release the vehicle to the petitioner, on the petitioner producing proof of ownership of the vehicle and undertaking not to alienate or part with possession of the vehicle until the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 are completed and on execution of a bond without sureties for the amount covered by Ext.P2. The appropriate authority under the Act shall complete the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The security furnished by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with the final orders to be passed. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// shg/ P.A. TO JUDGE