IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2011 / 28TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 658 of 2011(F) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SIESTA LIGISTICS CORPORATION LTD., REP. BY REEJ A.M.,34 YEARS,S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN C.M., SENIOR EXECUTIVE(OPERATIONS),SIESTA LIGISTICS CORPORATION LTD.,C.P.XI/655-S,S.M.TOWER, COCHIN BANK JUNCTION,ASOKAPURAM,ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. SRI.AZEEZ,AGED 34,S/O.HASSAN, KARAKKATTIL HOUSE, EDATHALA NORTH P.O., ALUVA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), ALAPPUZHA. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.1, COMMERCIAL TAXES, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), ALAPPUZHA. 3. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.1, COMMERCIAL TAXES, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), ALAPPUZHA. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.658 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The 1st petitioner is a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. Goods belonging to the 1st petitioner were detained under Section 47(2) of the Act for alleged attempt to evade tax. This writ petition is filed challenging the same. The 2nd petitioner is the owner of a lorry in which the goods were transporting. On 10.1.2011, this Court passed the following interim order. “Heard counsel for the petitioner and the GP appearing for respondents. The detention is because there was no documents accompanied with the transport at the time of interception. According to the petitioners, the bills and other documents were not in the custody of the driver because those documents were misplaced by the driver at his house from where transport commenced in the early morning of the date of detention. It is further stated that all the documents were produced before the authority on the same day itself. However, the authority declined to release the goods on issuing Ext.P8 observing that at the time of interception the driver had given a statement to the effect that the consignor had not entrusted any documents with him. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the 1st petitioner is the transporting agent of the Indian Tobacco Company Ltd and exclusively deals with the products of that company. Hence there is no chance of selling any items without proper bills, is the contention. The question whether there was any attempt in evasion of tax can be decided only after finalisation of the enquiry. It is noticed that the 1st petitioner before this court is only a transporting agent and the driver of the vehicle is not a registered dealer. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the goods can be released only on furnishing proper security. Therefore, there will be an interim direction to the 3rd respondent to release the goods along with vehicle which is detained by virtue of Ext.P7 notice, on the petitioners furnishing Bank guarantee for 50% of the amount of security deposit demanded under Ext.P6 and also on furnishing a joint security bond for the balance amount without sureties, in the form prescribed under the KVAT Rules. w.p.c.658/11 2 The petitioners will also furnish details of immovable properties, if any, owned by them, by producing proof regarding payment of land tax and producing proof regarding proper identification of the petitioners. Post the matter for further consideration on 18.1.2011.” In view of the interim order directing release of the goods on security, nothing remains to be done by this Court in this writ petition except to direct the 3rd respondent to complete the proceedings pursuant to the detention, expeditiously. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to complete the proceedings pursuant to the detention of the goods expeditiously. The security furnished by the petitioners for release of the goods as per the order of this Court shall be dealt with in accordance with the orders to be passed pursuant to the detention. The proceedings shall be completed within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge