IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2010 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32740 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SIRAJUDEEN. S,AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.SAID SULAIMAN, VETTUVAZHIYIL VEEDU, KUNDAYAM PO,PATHANAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR,SQUAD NO.3, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,ALAPPUZHA-PIN-688 001. 2. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE),ALAPPUZHA-PIN-688 001. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.32740 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Writ petition is filed aggrieved by detention of transport and issuance of Ext.P1 notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). According to the petitioner, 'teak poles' sold by the petitioner were transported to a dealer at 'Iruveli' on the strength of tax invoice. From Ext.P6 notice it is revealed that the 1st respondent, on verification, found that the date of the delivery note which accompanied the transport was 21.10.2010 whereas interception was only on 22.10.10. Further it was found that the invoice which accompanied the transport is bearing Serial No:1, which is the first invoice used during the financial year. At the same time, it is revealed from the Delivery Note that the petitioner had used 5 numbers of leaves contained in the book, during the year. Under the W.P.(C).32740/10-N -2- above circumstances genuineness of the transport was doubted and it was suspected that there is an attempt in evasion of payment of tax. Hence security deposit was demanded. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is a dealer mainly doing business locally with unregistered dealers, and the consignment in question is the first sale effected during the financial year to another dealer. It is submitted that the transport was genuine and there was no attempt in evasion of payment of tax. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. It is submitted that, apart from the defects noted in Ext.P1, it is reveled that on verification of KVATIS the petitioner is effecting huge quantity of local sales and it is submitted that the suspicion regarding evasion in payment of tax raised is genuine and reasonable. 4. Whether there was any attempt in evasion of payment of tax is a matter which need be decided on finalising the enquiry. I am of the opinion that pending W.P.(C).32740/10-N -3- finalisation of the enquiry the goods can be released on the petitioner furnishing security. 5. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to release the goods along with the vehicle, which is detained under Ext.P1 notice on the petitioner furnishing Bank guarantee for 50% of the amount demanded therein and also on furnishing Security Bond for the balance amount, in the form prescribed under the KVAT Rules, without sureties. 6. The competent authority will finalise the enquiry proceedings at the earliest possible, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb