IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19560 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.RANI TRAVELS, NORTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682018, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER-SRI.MILTON LOPEZ. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.19560 of 2010-T ---------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act, whereby the goods and the vehicle mentioned therein have been detained, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no rhyme or reason for having detained the goods, as the petitioner who is the owner and operator of various contract carriages had bought vehicle seats and fittings mentioned in Ext.P1 for 'own use'. The materials were purchased from the concerned vendor in Hosur, as covered by Ext.P2 series of invoices. Exts.P3 and P3(a) are the temporary permits issued to the concerned vehicles belonging to the petitioner and Exts.P4 and P4(a) are the sales certificates issued by the vehicle dealer, from whom the vehicles were purchased. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that absolutely no document as required W.P(C) No.19560 of 2010-T 2 under the relevant provisions of law, to sustain the transportation was there, which made the first respondent to detain the vehicle as well as the goods issuing Ext.P1 notice doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit, which is in conformity with the statutory requirements and not assailable under any circumstances. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner tried to explain the position with reference to the relevant records, but the same has not been properly considered by the concerned authorities and hence seeks for a direction to conduct an enquiry and to release the goods; for which detention of the vehicle is stated as not at all required. 5. After hearing both the sides and also taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that there was no 'Form 16' accompanying the goods to sustain the transport for 'own use' as alleged, this Court finds that the matter has necessarily to be enquired into by the concerned authorities. 6. In the above circumstances, the first respondent is directed to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which shall be finalised as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two weeks W.P(C) No.19560 of 2010-T 3 from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The goods concerned shall be down-loaded at the expense of the petitioner and the concerned vehicle shall be released forthwith. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab