IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2010 / 30TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 32087 of 2010(I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.K.SULAIMAN, PROPRIETOR, KPH WOODEN FURNITURE & TIMBERS, MUNDAKAYAM, PARATHANAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.G.HARIHARAN, SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR AT MINI CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKKUDA - 680 121. 2. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INT), COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR - 680 001. 3. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM - 686 506. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2010 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.32089 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).Nos.32087 & 32089 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The common petitioner in these two writ petitions is aggrieved by inaction on the part of the respondents in not completing the proceedings initiated under Section 47 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). The proceedings in question were initiated pursuant to interception and detention of transport of Timber, effected on 13.5.2010 and on 14.9.2010. The petitioner had remitted security deposits for release of the goods along with the vehicles as evidenced from Ext.P4 receipt in both the cases. But inspite of release of the detention, the respondents 1 and 2 had not taken any further steps as contemplated under Section 47(5) & (6) to complete the enquiry and to finalise the proceedings. According to the petitioner, if such enquiry is completed, there is every chance of W.P.(C).32087 & 32089 of 2010 -2- the petitioner being exonerated from any liability and in such case the petitioner will be entitled for refund of the amount of security deposit. Hence the petitioner is seeking appropriate directions to respondents 1 and 2 to finalise the matter at the earliest. 2. Heard Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Having considered the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary directions to respondents 1 and 2 to expedite the matter. 3. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to finalise the enquiry proceedings initiated pursuant to Ext.P3 notices in both the cases, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb