IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37278 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAPPAI SONS,CARMEL BUILDINGS, BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-18,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.R.MOHAN. BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALIDHARAN (AROOR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT CIRCLE-1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN -24. 3. SRI.T.C.KURAIAN, NO.1/620B, CHERUKUZHIYIL HOUSE, VATTAKUNNU KARA, 4. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, (WORKS CONTRACT & LUZURY TAX),ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.37278 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 23rd December,2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the detention of paint transported from their place of business to the work site of the 3rd respondent. The goods in question was sold by the petitioner to the 3rd respondent on the basis of Exts.P1 and P2 tax invoices on collecting value added tax at the rate of 12.5% The transport was accompanied with Exts.P1 and P2 invoices. Interception was made on issuing Ext.P3 notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act assigning the reason that the consignee is a works contractor who is liable to be registered under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and that the registration number of the consignee is not noted in the invoice. It is further alleged that the complete address of the consignee is not mentioned in the invoices which are issued in Form 8B. It is suspected that the consignor and the consignee were colluding together to evade payment of tax from the value addition which will be made when the goods in question is transferred in W.P ( C) No.37278 of 2009 2 execution of the works contract. 2. According to the petitioner, the consignee is also a registered dealer and he is paying tax with respect to the works contract at the compounded rate. It is further contended that with respect to the transaction in question between the petitioner and the consignee, there is absolutely no attempted evasion of tax which can be attributed. 3. I am not proposing to enter upon any findings regarding the question as to whether there was any attempted evasion of payment of tax. It is evident that both the petitioner as well as the consignee are registered dealers. Hence pending finalisation of the adjudication, I am of the opinion that the goods can be released on the petitioner furnishing proper security. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to release the goods along with the vehicle detained under Ext.P3 on the petitioner furnishing a security bond in the form provided under the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules without sureties for the W.P ( C) No.37278 of 2009 3 value of security deposit demanded therein. The competent authority under Section 47 (5) and (6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act is directed to finalise the adjudication with opportunity to the petitioner, at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of release of the goods. C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ma W.P ( C) No.37278 of 2009 4 W.P ( C) No.37278 of 2009 5