IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2010 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6924 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- YEN CEE'S BLUE METALS PVT.LTD., 405/6, GANAPATHY BUILDING, R.V.P.PUDUR, PALAKKAD, HAVING HEAD OFFICE AT POLLACHI, TAMILNADU, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.T.CHENTHAMARA. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.T.G.ABHILASH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECKPOST, ATHIKODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECKPOST, VALARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECKPOST, MENONPARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. 5. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 6924 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated, this the 4th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court praying for the following reliefs. (a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 1 to 3 or such other officers not to detain the goods transported by the petitioner on the ground of undervaluation and demand security. (b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 4 and 5 to pass orders on Exts.P4 and P5 directing the Inspecting Officials not to estimate the value of dust above the value disclosed in invoice and delivery note and demand security. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The goods brought by the petitioner were intercepted by the concerned respondent under Section 47 (2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, referring to the defect of 'under valuation', doubting evasion of tax and in turn demanding security deposit. It is stated that the petitioner has remitted the due amount and the goods were got cleared. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that every time, this sort of exercise is being pursued and hence the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court seeking to intercept such exercise WP(C) No.6924/2010 2 being pursued by the respondents. 5. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the cause of action being different, necessary notice will have to be issued every time pointing out the discrepancy or circumstances and that action being pursued by the respondents is perfectly within the four walls of law and not assailable under any circumstance. 6. This Court finds considerable force in the said submission and the main prayer raised by the petitioner is rather vague without reference to any specific instance. Being a general prayer, it is not liable to be entertained and the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court or such other appropriate authorities in respect of any grievance, if aggrieved of any of the action being pursued by the respondents; thus projecting the concerned cause of action at the relevant time. No interference was warranted and the Writ Petition is dismissed. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc