IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10168 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.T.JOSEPH, PROPRIETOR, PULINTHANAM TIMBERS, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 575. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN RESPONDENT --------------- THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.IV, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM AT PUNALUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 10168 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 25th March , 2010 J U D G M E N T The timber being transported in the vehicle bearing No. KL- 35A/4588 was intercepted by the first respondent issuing Ext. P4 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, suspecting evasion of tax and demanded security deposit, which forms the subject matter of challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits on the basis of the materials on record that, the detention is very much sustainable in view of the glaring discrepancies noted. It is stated that, while classifying and transporting the goods as ' Anjili logs' , on physical verification, it was found that the goods included 'Jackwood logs' as well. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, in the Delivery Note (Ext.P1) the seal affixed shows that it was for 'interstate movement' only, whereas transportation was only pursuant to W.P.(C) No. 10168 OF 2010 2 local sale. The case of the petitioner is that mis-description of goods was only due to some mistake. 3. The petitioner has virtually conceded the discrepancies noted, except the value of the goods, however seeking to explain the same as a mistake due to an inadvertent omission on the part of the staff. The factum of transportation of 'jackwood logs' is also very much conceded, though it is described as 'Vella' of low quality . 4. Considering the admitted extent of factual position as above, this Court finds that the challenge raised against Ext. P4 notice detaining the goods does not hold any water at all. However, though the actual position can be brought to light only in the course of adjudication proceedings, this Court does not find it necessary to detain the goods any further and the same can be released to petitioner on condition that the petitioner satisfies the demand in the notice either in the form of 'Bank Guarantee' or by way of 'cash deposit'. On satisfying the requirement as above , the goods shall be released to the petitioner forthwith. It is made clear that this will be without W.P.(C) No. 10168 OF 2010 3 prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to file a detailed objection if any in response to Ext.P4 notice and also the rights of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings, if any, which exercise shall be finalised as expeditiously as possible at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk