IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 30TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 5581 of 2010(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- ESSAR TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., 41/256 C-19, 2ND FLOOR, MATHER SQUARE, OPPOSITE NORTH RAILWAY STATION, KOCHI-18. REPRESENTED BY M.K. NARAYANAN, CIRCLE HEAD. BY ADV. SRI.VIJAYAN. K.U. SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN SRI.N.R.SAJ RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, CTCP, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT CIRCLE-I, ERNAKULAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY(TAXES), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 5581 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 notice issued under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, whereby the goods transported in the vehicle bearing registration No.MH 14 BJ 1267 were intercepted and detained on 17.02.10, pointing out some discrepancies. But according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is only a technical defect and prays for intervention of this Court in the matter. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits, referring to the undisputed facts as evidenced by records, that the goods in transport did not accompany the requisite documents as contemplated under Section 46(3) of the Act and that the petitioner was attempting to transport the goods only on the basis of delivery notes which did not bear any 'seal' of the authority concerned. 3. Considering the facts and figures, particularly as to the absence of the 'seal' on the delivery note, the transportation WP(C) No. 5581 of 2010 -:2:- pursued by the petitioner cannot be held as legal or proper and in such circumstances, the course pursued by the concerned respondent in detaining the vehicle as well as the goods by issuing Ext.P4 cannot be deprecated. However, this Court does not find it necessary to detain the vehicle as well as the goods any further and they can be released on terms. 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to release the vehicle and goods forthwith, on condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the amount shown in Ext.P4, simultaneously executes a 'simple bond' for the balance amount. It is also made clear that, this will be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to proceed with the adjudication proceedings, which exercise 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 ttb