IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 10TH MAY 2011 / 20TH VAISAKHA 1933 WP(C).No. 13159 of 2011(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DEVONSHIRE GREENS, ATTUKADU ROAD, PALLIVASAL, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.P.M.VARGHESE. BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK-POST, BODIMETTU, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613. SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV.SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 13159 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner firm is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short 'the Act') on the rolls of the second respondent. The petitioner firm has purchased one set of UPVC Door (DW-Sliding Door) of 4100 x 2100 size that was manufactured in Karnataka exclusively for own use. In fact, they were got manufactured in accordance with the specification of the building under constructions, it is contended. During its transportation, the vehicle was intercepted and the vehicle and the goods were taken into custody. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with Ext.P3 notice. As per Ext.P3, the petitioner was required to deposit an amount of Rs.1,97,170/- as security deposit in lieu of detention. On receipt of the same, the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 before the first respondent. However, the first respondent declined to receive the same and release the goods and insisted for payment of security deposit. It is in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the W.P.(C) NO.13159/2011 2 learned Government Pleader. As already noticed hereinbefore, the contention of the petitioner is that the goods in question were purchased solely for use in the resort which is being built by the petitioner. I do not think that this Court should consider the contentions raised in this Writ Petition on merits at this stage. These are matters to be decided by the concerned authority under Section 47 of the Act at the appropriate stage. The petitioner was required to deposit an amount of Rs.1,97,170/- as security deposit for releasing the vehicle in question. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to execute a security bond for the amount equivalent to the amount mentioned in Ext.P3. In the said circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the vehicle in question in case the petitioner executes a security bond equivalent to the amount mentioned in Ext.P3 viz., Rs.1,97,170/- and produces a copy of the registration certificate, forthwith. The competent authority shall also finalise the proceedings initiated expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.13159/2011 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.13159/2011 4