IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22731 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MOZART GLOBAL FURNITURE, N.H. CHANGUVETTY, KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.T. SAIDALAVI BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR ADV. SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT: --------------- INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, INVESTIGATION BRANCH, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 22731 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 10th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner was transporting certain wooden furniture items in the vehicle bearing No. KL10 R 3284 from Malappuram to Trivandrum for the purpose of exhibition. Eventhough, the goods were stated as accompanied with all the requisite documents contemplated under Section 46 (3) of the KVAT Act including Ext.P4 delivery note, it was intercepted by the respondent on 6.8.2009, leading to Ext. P5 notice issued under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act, 2003, where the incriminating circumstance noted is that, the goods though are meant for exhibition purpose, the required permission in form No. 4 C from the assessing authority as per the rule 17 (29) was not obtained. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the defect noted in Ext.P5 is not correct or sustainable and that the requisite permission in form No. 4 C as contemplated under rule 17 (2) is not a document which is supposed to accompany the goods as envisaged under Section 46 (3). The learned counsel further submits that, this is a document which is to be exhibited at the premises, where the exhibition is going on and that the petitioner, pursuant to the application filed in this regard has obtained such sanction today. A fax copy of the same WP (C) No. 22731 of 2009 : 2 : has been produced for perusal of this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, particularly in view of the permission stated as obtained by the petitioner for conducting the exhibition, this Court finds that the vehicle as well as the goods are no more liable to be detained by the respondent. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to release the vehicle as well as the goods to the petitioner immediately, on condition that the petitioner pays the 'advance tax' in respect of the said goods. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd WP (C) No. 22731 of 2009 : 3 :