IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30091 of 2010(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ GLASS POINT, REPRESENTED BY PROPRIETOR SHAJAHAN, P.H.ROAD, CHALAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.SADASIVAN, SRI.JOY P.JOSE, SRI.K.N.KRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, SRI.SOJAN MATHEW, SRI.C.V. SASI. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, AMARAVILA. PIN 695 122. 3. ASST.COMMISSIONER (ASST), KVAT SPL.CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30091 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is aggrieved by detention of transport of Glass, Plywood and Hardware items sold interstate to a party at Marthandam, on the basis of Exts.P5 to P8 invoices. According to the petitioner, the transport was accompanied by Exts.P3 and P4 Delivery Notes issued in form No.15, apart from the invoices mentioned above. But the goods were intercepted at the border check post at Amaravila on issuing Ext.P9 notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 . 2. The reasons for detention mentioned in Ext.P9 is that the Delivery Notes which were accompanying with transport contained authorisation only for internal movement of goods and that the petitioner was not entitled for interstate transport on the strength of such W.P.(C).30091/10-J -2- Delivery Notes. According to the petitioner it was only due to a bonafide mistake that forms which are not authenticated for interstate movement were used. It is contended that the transaction had already suffered tax and there was no allegation regarding any attempt for evasion in payment of tax. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents pointed out that, there are specific endorsements on Exts.P3 & P4 that those Delivery Notes are intended only for internal movement, and hence the contention of the petitioner that it is a bonafide mistake, could not be accepted. 4. Question whether there was any attempt in evasion of payment of tax warranting imposition of penalty, need not be decided in this writ petition, in view of the enquiry which has to be followed, as provided under Section 47 of the Act. I am of the opinion that the goods can be ordered to be released on the petitioner furnishing proper security. W.P.(C).30091/10-J -3- 5. The 2nd respondent is directed to release the goods along with vehicle, which is detained under Ext.P9 notice, on the petitioner remitting 50% of the security deposit demanded, towards the Advance Tax without prejudice to finalisation of proceedings under Section 47. The petitioner shall also furnish security bond in the form prescribed under the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, without sureties, for the balance amount. 6. The competent authority will finalise the enquiry at the earliest possible, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of release of the goods. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb