IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 32024 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.COMPUTER GRAPHICS LTD., ST.BENEDICT JUNCTION, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, K.VENKAT SAI. BY ADVS. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENT: ------------------- COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.1, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682015. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.32024 of 2010-C ---------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by detention of a transport of X-ray films consigned through railway, on issuing Ext.P5 notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act). According to the petitioner the goods were despatched on stock transfer basis from their factory at Goa on the strength of Exts.P2 and P3 invoices cum delivery challan. Ext.P4 parcel way bill is produced in order to prove that the goods were transported through railway. On a perusal of Ext.P5, it is revealed that the goods were intercepted at Ernakulam South Railway Station premises. The reason for detention mentioned in Ext.P5 is that, on verification the goods were not seen declared at any border check posts or any offices. Therefore suspecting evasion of payment of tax, security deposit was demanded. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, it is evident from the invoices cum delivery challans as well as from the parcel way bill that the goods were transported through railway on W.P(C) No.32024 of 2010-C 2 the strength of valid documents. Therefore it is submitted that there was no attempt in evasion of payment of tax. 3. Learned Government Pleader, per contra, contended that, as per Section 46(3)(e) the petitioner was bound to declare the consignment despatched through railway, before the Commercial Tax Officer concerned and failure to submit such declaration will amount to a transport without proper documents. It is contended that there is every chance of the petitioner using the documents, if it would not have been intercepted, for multiple transports. Therefore the petitioner should be insisted for payment of security deposit, is the contention. 4. The question to be decided is as to whether there was any attempt in evasion of payment of tax. Since an enquiry as contemplated under Section 47 is to be completed, I am not entering upon any findings regarding this dispute. I am of the opinion that the goods can be released pending finalisation of the enquiry. 5. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to release the goods detained under Ext.P5, along with the vehicle, on the petitioner furnishing W.P(C) No.32024 of 2010-C 3 Security Bond in the form prescribed under the KVAT Rules, without sureties. 6. The competent authority is directed to finalise the enquiry at the earliest possible, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of release of the goods. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab