IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/9TH POUSHA 1933 WPC.No. 35255 of 2011 (F) PETITIONER(S) : 1 TOMY JOSEPH S/O. JOSEPH AGED 47 YEARS RESIDING AT KANAKKALIL HOUSE UPPUTHARA P.O. IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR SRI. ANITHA MENON RESPONDENT(S) : 1 INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR SQUAD NO.VI OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES KOZHIKODE-673 001. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. SUDEESH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-12-2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DCS WPC.No. 35255 of 2011 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :- EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC.47(2)KVAT ACT. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE DELIVERY NOTE AND TAX INVOICE. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE PURCHASE BILL WHICH IS PART OF SALE ARRANGEMENT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE VEHICLE OWNER TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE PETITIONERS REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE UNDER KVAT RULES. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE PETITIONERS REGISTRATION UNDER CENTRAL SALES TAX RULES. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE DCS P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 35255 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The goods, transported by the petitioner in the lorry bearing No: KL37 3482, were intercepted at the concerned check post by the respondent, issuing Ext.P1 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act doubling evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent of Rs.1,00,748/-. The case of the petitioner is that the grounds shown in Ext.P1 notice are not correct or sustainable and that explanation has already been offered by the petitioner vide Ext.P4, supported with other materials to justify the stand. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of filing the explanation, the same is still to be acted upon; which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. 2. Heard the learned Govt. Pleader as well, who submits that the pleadings raised by the petitioner are not WP(C) NO. 35255 OF 2011 ..2.. sustainable either on facts or in law. The matter has to be considered and adjudicated by way of appropriate course of action. 3. However, considering the facts and circumstances and also the nature of the dispute involved, this Court finds it fit and proper to have the goods released, subject to the condition that the petitioner satisfies 1/3rd of the liability covered by Ext.P1 and executes a 'simple bond' in respect of the balance amount; upon which the goods shall be released to the petitioner forthwith. The respondent is directed to have the adjudication proceedings finalized in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months thereafter. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE bka/-