IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25237 of 2008(D) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ PIONEER TRADERS, (PROPRIETARY CONCERN) 39/1489-5 RAJA TOWER, KALYANI HOSPITAL ROAD, CHALAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS MANAGER MR.D.SUNIL KUMAR. BY ADV. SMT.K.LATHA RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.IV DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 25237 OF 2008 D -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th August, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking to challenge Exts.P3, P5 and the latest Ext.P9 revised notices. Petitioner also seeks release of the goods and a direction not to proceed further with Ext.P3 and its extended notices and the latest revised Ext.P9 notices. Ancillary reliefs are also sought. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner purchased some defective DVDs having some small defects which will be sold at the rate of Rs.600/= each, even though MRP value is shown at Rs.3,000/= printed on it and these products having some defects will not be sold at the normal rate and the interstate sale will be made at Rs.1,000/= per DVD. Petitioner relies on Ext.P1 Invoices. "D2" is relied on in Ext.P1 which is alleged to mean defected. While so, the goods are detained under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act. Originally, WPC.25237/08 D 2 Ext.P3 was issued to which petitioner filed Ext.P4 reply and the second respondent issued another calculation notice as Ext.P5. Petitioner filed Ext.P6 reply. Petitioner had filed a Writ Petition and this Court directed consideration of the objection (Ext.P6). Thereupon, Ext.P9 revised defective notice was issued. Ext.P11 is the reply to the revised notice. The original security demanded is Rs.5,82,320/=. Apparently, it is after considering the reply of the petitioner that the revised notice is issued and the security is demanded in a sum of Rs.2,57,550/=. In respect of 492 DVDs the value is fixed at Rs.2,000/= each and the value for 88 DVDs is fixed at Rs.7,000/= each. It is thus that as against the value shown in the transport documents of Rs.5,82,320/=, the amount of Rs.16 Lakhs was arrived at. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Smt. K. Latha, learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the goods were indeed defective WPC.25237/08 D 3 and it is for the seller to sell at the price according to the value. She placed reliance on Ext.P1 Invoices under which the goods are, according to her, shown as defective. Learned Government Pleader on the other hand contended that it was after the goods were verified, that too in the presence of the petitioner, that Ext.P9 revised notice has been issued. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I feel that the adjudication must be completed at the earliest. Learned Government Pleader submits that the adjudication can be completed within one month from today. I see no reason to direct the release of the goods except upon furnishing security or upon furnishing Bank Guarantee. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the second respondent that if the petitioner is prepared to furnish Bank Guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P9, the goods will be released forthwith to the petitioner. At any rate, the adjudication proceedings will be completed within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. If the petitioner is not getting the goods released on WPC.25237/08 D 4 furnishing Bank Guarantee, necessarily the goods which are detained shall be kept in safe custody of the second respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. //True Copy// PS to Judge