IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2010 / 23RD ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31603 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ M/S.KAIL LIMITED, REGD. OFFICE AT AUTO CARS COMPOUND, ADALAT ROAD, AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA STATE, A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY HAVING THEIR BRANCH OFFICE AMONG OTHER PLACES AT “SANTHI EMERALD”, 3RD FLOOR, CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI – 682 020, REPRESENTED BY SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, BRANCH COMMERCIAL CONTROLLER. BY ADVS. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1). THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM 691001. 2). THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 31603 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by the detention of goods and issuance of notice under Section 47 (2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. The goods detained are 15 numbers of Television sets and 15 numbers of Refrigerators, which were sold to registered dealers, on the strength of tax invoices issued in form No. 8, after collecting VAT at the rate of 12.5%. The goods were detained for the reason that, the invoices with respect to 15 numbers of Refrigerators were dated 30.09.2010, whereas the delivery note which accompanied the transport was bearing date as 11.10.2010. With respect to one of the invoices it is also noticed that the goods were destined to a dealer at Kollam, but the vehicle was seen loaded with the goods when it was moving towards Thiruvananthapuram. Due to the delay occurred in the 2 WP(C) No. 31603/2010 transport, genuineness of the transport was suspected and apprehension was expressed to the effect that the dealer might have effected previous transports on the strength of the very same invoices. 2. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, eventhough the invoices were drawn on 30.09.2010, the transport could not be effected on that day itself because of non availability of transport facilities. It is only because it was transported on a subsequent date, that a delivery note was also issued along with the transport. With respect to goods destined to Kollam it is stated that the goods happened to be there in the vehicle only because the dealer has refused to accept those goods and the same was endorsed on the backside of the invoice itself. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the delay occurred in transport gives rise to reasonable suspection regarding attempt in evasion of payment of tax and 3 WP(C) No. 31603/2010 therefore the petitioner should be insisted for payment of security deposit. 4. The question as to whether there was any attempt in evasion of payment of tax is a matter which will be decided on finalisation of the enquiry, as contemplated under Section 47. I am of the opinion that the goods need not be detained till finalisation of the enquiry. The petitioner is a registered dealer and he claims to be a dealer regularly paying tax. Therefore I am of the opinion that the goods can be released on the petitioner furnishing security. 5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to release the goods along with vehicle detained under Ext.P9 notice, on the petitioner furnishing security bond for the value demanded therein. The security bond shall be furnished in the form prescribed under KVAT Rules, without sureties, signed by the person in charge of the branch of the petitioner company at Cochin. 6. The competent authority under Section 47 will 4 WP(C) No. 31603/2010 finalise the enquiry, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of release of the goods. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc