IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2010 / 2ND MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2293 of 2010(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. M/S.RAIJINDRA LUBRICANTS, XII/999, NIDA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD,REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MRS.AISWARYA MENON. 2. M/S.INDUS SPECIALITY OILS, XII/813, MENONPARA ROAD, KANJIKODE PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.MADHU KUMAR MENON. BY ADV. SRI.K.SRIKUMAR SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.V, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERY, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, 2ND CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 2293 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated, this the 22nd day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The goods transported by the petitioners to the destination at different places in the vehicle bearing registration No. KL-9/C-2598 were intercepted by the 1st respondent on 18.01.2010, issuing Exts.P3 and P4 notices under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act suspecting evasion of tax and thus demanding security deposit to the extent specified therein. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the vehicle had sustained some damage on the date of transport, i.e., on 16.01.2010 and since the next day was a Sunday being a holiday for the consignees, the vehicle got repaired and the goods were transported on the next day, i.e., on 18.01.2010, when the vehicle was intercepted, leading the issuance of Exts.P3 and P4 notices. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Exts.P5 and P6 bills issued by some spare parts dealers and submits that the delay occurred was only due to the mechanical problems of the vehicle carrying the consignment and there is no attempt to evade payment of tax under any circumstance. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well; who WP(C) No.2293/2010 2 vehemently opposed the petition, stating that the pleadings and testimony do not reconcile with each other. However, considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to detain goods any further and that the same can be releaed to the petitioners on condition that they deposit 50% of the amount shown in Ext.P4 and furnishe 'simple bond' for the balance on satisfying the requirement as above, the vehicle as well as the goods detained as per Exts.P3 and P4 shall be released to the petitioners forthwith. However, this will be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to proceed with the adjudication proceedings, if any, 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 as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc