IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2011 / 28TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 825 of 2011(C) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- VASU COCO RESORTS PVT. LTD., VP II/326 B, VAYALAR CHERTHALA, ALLEPPEY-688536, REP. BY ITS ACCOUNTS MANAGER, SURESH KUMAR. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER II, CHERTHALA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SUQAD II, COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-682 016 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY(TAXES), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 ADV.MR. V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN – GOVT.PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 825 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a dealer under the KGST and CST Act. They are aggrieved by detention of their goods on allegation of an attempt to evade tax. At the time of admission, this Court passed the following interim order on 11.1.2011: “Heard counsel for the petitioner and Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The main reason for detention is that two numbers of Form-16 declaration were accompanied with the transport whereas the goods under transport, which is a Generator Set, was covered only by one of such Form-16 documents. Further the authority noticed that there is an overwriting on the Consignment Note, which was not properly authenticated. 2. According to the learned counsel the order was placed for two Gen Sets and the two Gen Sets were transported simultaneously in two vehicles. It was only due to an inadvertence that the driver of the first vehicle, who was having custody of the documents, had produced both the Form-16 to the authorities of the Check Post. 3. Considering the fact that the petitioner is a registered dealer and that the invoices are drawn in the name of the petitioner for own use and in view of the fact that there was ownership declaration with respect to the goods in question I am of the view that pending finalisation of the enquiry the goods can be released on the petitioner on furnishing Security Bond. 4. Therefore there will be an interim direction to the 2nd respondent or the authority concerned to W.P.(C)No.825/11 2 release the goods along with the vehicle which was detained on the basis of Ext.P4 notice, on the petitioner furnishing Security Bond for the value of deposit demanded therein in the form prescribed under the KVAT Rules, without sureties. Post the matter for further consideration on 17.1.2011.” Pursuant to the same, the goods have been released. In the above circumstances, nothing further needs to be done in this writ petition except to direct the respondents to complete the proceedings initiated by detention of the goods in accordance with law. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to complete the proceedings initiated by detention of the goods of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. The security provided by the petitioner as per the interim order shall be dealt with in accordance with the orders to be passed in the proceedings pursuant to the detention. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.825/11 3 W.P.(C)No.825/11 4