IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19197 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SAYNISREE, W/O. SUNISH, 241(307), AISWARYA, 11, PAMBADI, THIRUVILWAMALA PANCHAYAT, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. K.I.MOHAMMED, KODUVALLI HOUSE, AMBACHALODE, MANNARKAD. BY ADV. MR.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.1, COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRICHUR. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.1, TRICHUR. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHECK POST, WALAYAR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT., COMMERCIAL TAXES, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ......................................... WP (C) No. 19197 of 2010 ......................................... Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T ------------------------ The petitioners effected construction of residential buildings in the properties belonging to them, on the strength of valid permits issued by the local authorities concerned, as borne by Exhibit P4 and P7 respectively. They purchased Granite Slabs and Granite Tiles from M/s. Aryan Granites, Bangalore and the goods were being transported in the vehicle bearing No. TN 28 AB/ 0832, when it was intercepted by the first respondent on 16.06.2010, issuing Exhibit P1 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein. 2. The case of the petitioners is that the relevant documents in respect of the goods purchased by the first petitioner happened to be misplaced at the check post at Chavadi during the course of inspection and the position was explained with reference to the relevant records when 2 WP (C) No. 19197 of 2010 detention was made by the first respondent on 16.06.2010. There is an allegation of 'excess quantity', when compared with the figures given in the concerned permits, which according to the petitioners is to given due waitage to the breakage or shortage in the course of transportation and the completion of construction. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits that the factual position with regard to the absence of valid documents to support one consignment and also with regard to the 'excess quantity' of the materials stands rather conceded. It is also stated that the penalty under Section 69(1) has also been imposed as evident from Exhibit P1. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners are in dire necessity of the materials and detention of the same is causing irreparable loss and hardships to the petitioners, in so far as the construction work is badly affected. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to 3 WP (C) No. 19197 of 2010 furnish sufficient security in the form of collateral property. 5. After hearing both the sides, the 2nd petitioner is directed to satisfy the actual tax liability in respect of the excess quantity as assured and undertaken by the learned counsel and both the petitioners shall furnish sufficient security in the manner specified as per the relevant rules on which event the goods shall be released to the petitioners forthwith. 6. This will be without prejudice to the rights of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings in accordance with law, which shall be finalized at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of, as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. rkc