IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2010 / 23RD ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31602 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ M/S.VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LIMITED, REGD. OFFICE AT AUTO CARS COMPOUND, ADALAT ROAD, AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA STATE, A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY HAVING THEIR BRANCH OFFICE AMONG OTHER PLACES AT “SANTHI EMERALD”, 3RD FLOOR, CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI – 682 020, REPRESENTED BY SRI.S.P.KOSHY, MANAGER, COMMERCIAL TAX . BY ADVS. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1). THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM 691001. 2). THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 31602 OF 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Goods consigned from the branch office of the petitioner at Cochin to a dealer at Thiruvananthapuram, on the strength of tax invoice drawn in Form No. 8 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, was detained by the first respondent. Ext.P2 is the notice issued under Section 47 (2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. On a perusal of Ext.P2, it revealed that the reason for detention mentioned is that, the invoice is dated 09.10.2010 whereas the transport was intercepted at 14.30 hours on 12.10.2010. It was suspected that the dealer might have effected another transport of the goods of the very same description on 09.10.2010 itself, and that he may be using the same invoice for a subsequent transport. 2. According to the petitioner the delay in effecting transport was caused only due to non 2 WP(C) No. 31602/2010 availability of vehicles and there was no malafide intentions or any attempt in evasion of payment of tax. 3. Learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, contended that the delay caused effecting the transport gives rise to a reasonable suspection regarding genuineness of transport and on an attempt in evasion of payment of tax. 4. Since the question whether there was any attempt in evasion of payment of tax is an issue need be decided on finalisiation of the enquiry, I am of the opinion that the goods can be ordered to be released on the petitioner furnishing proper security. It is noticed that the petitioner is a registered dealer who claims to be regularly paying tax amount. 5. Under the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to release the goods along with the vehicle, detained under Ext.P2, on the petitioner furnishing security bond in the form prescribed under the KVAT Rules, without sureties, for the value of 3 WP(C) No. 31602/2010 demand thereunder. The security bond will be furnished by the person in charge of the Cochin branch of the petitioner company. 6. The competent authority under Section 47 is directed to finalise the enquiry 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 release of the goods. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc