IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2009 / 13TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21937 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- FOCUS CORPORATION PVT. LTD., FOCUS TOWERS, EDAPPALLY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TONY RAPHAEL. BY ADV. MS. S.K.DEVI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SQUAD NO.I, KOLLAM-691 021. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, SALES TAX OFFICE, SPL. CIRCLE I, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No.21937 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 4th August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner Company is a dealer of Automobile Spare parts having its Head Office at Edappally and different service centres at Trivandrum, Kollam, Alappuzha, Kottayam and Kozhencherry. Five different consignments to the five service centres as mentioned above were transported in the vehicle bearing No. KL-7B-9529. When the said vehicle was proceeding to Kollam, after effecting delivery at Kottayam, Kozhencherry and Trivandrum, it was intercepted by the first respondent, leading to issuance of Ext. P2 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, pointing out some defects as mentioned therein. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, by virtue of very nature of the consignments and transportation and also the places covered, the alleged incriminating circumstances noted in Ext. P2 are not at all correct or sustainable and as such, the detention of the vehicle as well as the goods is not liable to be upheld , which hence is under challenge. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, to W.P.(C) No.21937 OF 2009 2 prove the bonafides, the petitioner is willing either to execute a personal bond, or to clear the advance tax without prejudice to the steps for adjudication, if any, to be pursued at the hands of the respondents. 5. In the above facts and circumstances, the first respondent is hereby directed to release the goods as well as the vehicle to the petitioner immediately on executing a 'personal bond' to the satisfaction of the first respondent. This will be without prejudice to the right of the first respondent to pursue the adjudication proceedings and to have it finalised, which exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk