IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34305 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.PONNUSWAMY NADAR, PRIPRIETOR, KRISHNAN & COMPANY NO.15 CHELIMADA, K.K.ROAD, KUMILI- 685 909, DIST. IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SQUAD NO.III, IDUKKI AT DEVIKULAM. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (ENQUIRY), SQUAD NO.IV,OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, IDUKKI AT NEDUMKANDAM. 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.34305 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is challenging Ext.P2 proceedings, and inter alia seeks direction for refund of a sum of Rs.19,400/-, which was deposited for the purpose of release of goods detained under Ext.P1 notice, pursuant to a proceedings initiated under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). 2. A transport of 90 bags of 'Toor Dal' consigned on the strength of invoice dt.6.10.2010, sold by the petitioner to the Civil Supplies Corporation was intercepted enroute by the 1st respondent on issuing Ext.P1 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, demanding security deposit to the tune of Rs.19,400/-. The detention was released on payment of the security deposit as evidenced from Ext.P2 and P3. Subsequently the petitioner had submitted detailed explanation before the 2nd respondent as evidenced from Ext.P4. 3. According to the petitioner, even after being W.P.(C).34305/10-K -2- convinced that there was no mala fide intention in the transport and there was no attempt in evasion of payment of tax, the 2nd respondent is not finalising the matter and refunding the security deposit. Hence appropriate direction is sought for. 4. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering the fact that Section 47 (5) and (6) of the KVAT Act contemplates an enquiry followed by the detention, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to finalise the enquiry at the earliest possible. 5. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to finalise the enquiry pursuant to Ext.P2 and P3 on the basis of Ext.P4 explanation, at the earliest possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be afforded with an adequate opportunity to produce documents in support of his claim and also effective opportunity of personal hearing before finalisation of the matter. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb