IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 16TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3605 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- UNIPOWER TRANSFORMERS PVT.LTD, KINFRA INDUSTRIAL PARK, NELLAD PO, NEAR MUVATTUPUZA,ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-686 721,REPRSENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR SQUAD II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA, CHENGANNUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 3605 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the manufacturer of transformer units and the goods manufactured by the petitioner stated as being supplied to M/s.Asiatic Hospitality (P) Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram, in the vehicle bearing No. KL 7 BG 4018 were intercepted by the 1st respondent on 02.02.2010 issuing notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, doubting evasion of tax because of the glaring inconsistencies in the documents accompanying the transport and thus demanding security to the extent as specified therein, which according to the petitioner is not correct or sustainable and is sought to be intercepted by this Court. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no rhyme or reason in detaining the vehicle as well as the goods in so far a defect pointed out is only a technical one. It is stated that the goods were originally loaded in the vehicle bearing No. KL 5C 808 which was a DCM Toyota Mini lorry and on finding that the goods cannot be carried in the said vehicle, they were reloaded in another vehicle bearing No. KL 7 BG 4018. Despite explaining the position to the WP(C) No.3605/2010 2 respondents, the vehicle as well as the goods have been wrongly detained, submits the learned counsel. 3. The above contention is rebutted from the part of the respondent by the learned Government Pleader, who produced the originals of the relevant records, asserting that there is a conscious manipulation in the entries contained in the documents particularly with regard to the number of the vehicles, also effecting manual corrections in the invoices which is contrary to the statutory prescription. It is also stated that the Form 16 declaration is also not a valid one; under which circumstance, the detention made by the respondent is perfectly within the four walls of the law and not assailable under any circumstance; submits the learned Government Pleader. 4. Taking note of the fact that the goods are immediately to be supplied to the consignee as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court does not find it necessary to detain the vehicle as well as the goods; subject to the rights and liberties of the respondent to pursue further steps in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to furnish 'Bank Guarantee' to the amount shown in Ext.P5 and on satisfying the said requirement, the vehicle as well as the goods shall be released to the petitioner forthwith. However, this will be without prejudice to the right of the respondent to pursue the adjudication WP(C) No.3605/2010 3 proceedings, which shall be finalised, 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 accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc