IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15313 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- UNITECH WIRELESS (SOUTH) PRIVATE LTD., IIIRD FLOOR, VANAKARATH TOWERS, NH BYEPASS, PADIVATTOM, COCHIN-682 024, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY. ASHOK K.S BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SQUAD NO.III, KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.15313 of 2010-L ---------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is a registered dealer under the KVAT and CST Acts in the State of Kerala has caused transportation of some materials for providing necessary infra structure in connection with the business by virtue of being a licensee under the Government of India to provide Mobile GSM based mobile Tele Communication service in the Kerala Circle . The said goods were transported by the petitioner on the strength of relevant documents in the vehicle bearing No.KL-07 BX 5396, which was intercepted on the way on 13.5.2010 at midnight, issuing Ext.P3 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax and in turn demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein, which is subjected to challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transportation is very much supported by relevant documents; that the goods are never intended for sale, they being the essential materials for erecting the structures and to provide service to the W.P(C) No.15313 of 2010-L 2 customers, which otherwise are not capable of being sold by themselves. It is further contended that, they being 'capital goods', the detention would serve no purpose. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Sasi Road Finishers & engineering Contractors V. State of Kerala (2010) 1 GST 242 (Ker) 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that there is no evidence to show that the goods are 'capital goods' and that the decision sought to be relied on by the petitioner is not applicable and that different destinations have been shown in Ext.P2 transfer challans, showing addresses of different private parties. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the goods are in fact intended to be transported to the different destinations so as to erect the structures at the concerned sites, showing the address of the landloard/owner of the premises, where the materials had to be unloaded. The explanation offered from the part of the petitioner prima facie, appears to be very much plausible. 5. In the above circumstance, this Court finds that the vehicle as well as the goods need not be detained any further and W.P(C) No.15313 of 2010-L 3 that the same can be released to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner executes a 'simple bond' to the extent of the security deposit mentioned in Ext.P3 notice. However, 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. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab