IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22548 of 2009() ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S PANASONIC ENERGY INDIA COMPANY LIMITED, DOOR NOR. 3/486, THAIKAVU JUNCTION, CHERANALLOOR, KOCHI 682034 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY BY ADV. MR. A.KUMAR RESPONDENT: --------------- THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO IV, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No.22548 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 7th August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The goods transported by the petitioner from Cheranalloor to Aluva in the vehicle bearing No. KL.8V. 4701 were intercepted by the respondent on 03.08.2009, leading to issuance of Ext. P2 notice issued under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act. The incriminating circumstances pointed out in Ext. P2 is that the invoice clearly revealed that the same was issued on 31.07.2009 whereas the goods were being transported only three days thereafter, under which circumstance, the authority doubted possible evasion of tax, thus demanding security deposit to the extent as specified in Ext. P2. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has raised many a contention to sustain the delay, pointing out that the goods were loaded only on 03.08.2009. But the documents produced before this Court do not convince this Court to arrive at any such inference. The materials brought on record would show that the goods were being transported only later. In any view of the W.P.(C) No.22548 OF 2009 2 matter, this is a matter to be adjudicated by the concerned authorities in appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law. 3. However, taking note of the turn of events and also after hearing the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, there will be a direction to the respondent to release the vehicle as well as the goods covered by Ext. P2 to the petitioner, on condition that the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee for the amount shown in Ext. P2. On satisfying the requirement as above, the goods as well as the vehicle shall be released to the petitioner. It is also made clear that this will be without prejudice to the right of the respondent to pursue the adjudication proceedings, which exercise shall be finalised 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