IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21225 of 2010(C) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SADIQUE SAID ALI, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.IQUBAL, PROPRIETOR OF M/S.STONE PARK, DOOR NO.10/88-89, INTUC JUNCTION, NETTOOR, COCHIN-682 304. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.IV, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR, KUNNAMKULAM. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.IV, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR. 4. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE, TRIPPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, OFFICE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIPPUNITHURA. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMCHANDRA MENON, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.21225 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is a registered dealer under the KVAT Act, transported certain goods on the strength of Ext.P1 invoice in the vehicle bearing No.KA 01/D/698 which was intercepted on the way, on 3.7.2010, leading to issuance of Ext.P2 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax, demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the course pursued by the concerned respondent is not at all correct or proper and there is absolutely no rhyme or reason for stating that the invoice does not reflect the correct market value. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the nature of the defect referred to in Ext.P2, this Court finds that the matter has to be adjudicated by the appropriate authority, in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. But for Wpc 21225/2010 2 that reason, the goods need not be retained any further and the same shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, on condition that the petitioner executes a `simple bond' in respect of the security deposit demanded vide Ext.P2. This will be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings, which shall be finalised in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE lgk