IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2010 / 15TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24824 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.SILVER CLOUD ESTATES (P) LIMITED 1/122-A, SILVER CLOUD ESTATE, GUDALUR, THE NILGIRIS-643 211 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY P.S.N.NATARAJAN. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.IV, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, O/O.INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE) KOZHIKODE. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR-678 624. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR-678 624. 4. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.24824 of 2010-C ---------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is stated as registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, as borne by Ext.P1 certificate of registration and also the registered dealer under the KVAT Act, as borne by Ext.P3 certificate of registration, was transporting certain goods (tea dust), in the vehicle bearing No.TN 43B 5495 from Kochi to Gudalur, when the same was intercepted on 4.8.2010, issuing Ext.P4 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein. 2. The main reason pointed out in the impugned notice is that, the goods under transport are not accompanied by any documents as contemplated under Section 46(3) of the KVAT Act, in so far no delivery note but for a letter addressed to M/s.Leegee Corporation, Kochi, stating the withdrawal of 5000 Kgs. of tea from their warehouse. The explanation offered from the part of the petitioner in Ext.P15 shows that the circumstances noted in Ext.P4 is not correct as to the absence of documents and the explanation is W.P(C) No.24824 of 2010-C 2 that it was only a bonafide mistake. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Taking note of the undisputed facts and circumstances, this Court finds that this is a matter which requires to be adjudicated by the concerned authority in accordance with the relevant provisions of the law. However, this Court does not find it necessary to detain the goods as well as the vehicle any further and the same shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, on satisfying the requirement stipulated in Ext.P4, either in the form of 'cash' or in the form of 'Bank Guarantee'. This will be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings, if any, which shall be finalised in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab