IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2010 / 18TH JYAISTHA 1932 W.P(C).No. 17648 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MOHAN KUMAR, LEGAL OFFICER, M/S.JAY TRADERS, RESIDING AT MANGALAVIL VEEDU, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, B.MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, B.MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. SEASON READY WEAR, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 17648 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 8th June , 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is before this Court because of the detention of the goods, issuing Ext. P2 notice under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act , doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is representing M/s. Jay Traders, who are registered dealers under the relevant provisions of the VAT Act in Gujarat and that the petitioner was forwarding consignments pursuant to Ext.P1 invoice to the third respondent herein. However in the course of transit, referring to the value of some other consignments carried along with the aforesaid consignments, the respondents issued Ext.P2 doubting evasion of tax on the ground of 'undervaluation', in respect of the concerned consignment, vide Ext.P3. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is black and white difference between the quality of the W.P.(C) No. 17648 OF 2010 2 products and the course pursued by the respondents is not proper. Because of the turn of events, the third respondent has not cleared the goods but has issued Ext. P4 letter stating that they do not have any objection to have it released to the petitioner. It is also stated that the petitioner is ready and willing to satisfy the deposit demanded in Ext.P2. 4. In the above circumstances, there will be a direction to the respondents to release the goods to the petitioner forthwith on condition that the petitioner satisfies the security deposit demanded in Ext. P2. The adjudication proceedings, if any, shall be finalised, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk