IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 2ND ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29583 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.MARVEL GRANITES, PROPRIETOR, V/E 26 b, CVS COMPLEX, CHANGARAMKULAM P.O., ALEKODE, PONNANI TALUK-679555, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, P. SELVAN, S/O. PALANI, AGED 29 YEARS. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.IV, ERNAKULAM, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN-24. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, CTCP, WALAYAR. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM-695001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.29583 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner in this writ petition, who is a registered dealer, is seeking direction for release of the goods as well as the vehicle which was intercepted and detained pursuant to Ext.P3 notice issued under Section 47 (2) and Ext.P4 notice issued under Section 69(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). At the time of interception the vehicle was carrying Granite Slabs brought from Bangalore. According to the petitioner, it was an interstate purchase effected on the strength of invoice which accompanied the transport. 2. From Ext.P3 it is evident that on interception and physical verification of the goods the detaining authority found that there is considerable variation in the quantity of Granite Slabs transported. Hence, W.P.(C).29583/10-W -2- suspecting attempt in evasion of payment of tax, security deposit was demanded. As per Ext.P4, proposal was issued to the owner of the vehicle calling for submitting objection if any against the imposition of penalty under Section 69(1). 3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the allegations in Exts.P3 & P4 are not true and correct, because the measurement was not done in a proper manner, excluding the broken slabs. 4. Heard, Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The question as to whether there was any attempt in evasion of payment of tax as well as the question as to whether the transport was made without the documents required under Section 46(3) are matters which need be decided on finalising the proceedings now initiated under Exts.P3 & P4. I am not entering upon any findings regarding those aspects, on the basis of the rival contentions. I am of the opinion that the goods as well as the vehicle can be released pending finalisation of the proceedings, on the petitioner furnishing proper security. W.P.(C).29583/10-W -3- 5. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to release the goods as well as the vehicle detained under Exts.P3 & P4, on the petitioner furnishing Bank Guarantee for the amount of security deposit demanded under Ext.P4 and also on furnishing security bond as provided under the KVAT Rules, without sureties, for the amount demanded under Ext.P3. 6. Respondents will finalise the proceedings initiated under Ext.P3 and P4 at the earliest possible, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to the owner of the vehicle, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of release of the goods. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb