IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 15847 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- JELBIN FURNITURE WORKS, GURUDEV NAGAR, CHEVOOR P.O., TRICHUR REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPREITOR GOERGE C.R., S/O C.A. THOMAS, CHIRATTA HOUSE, CHEVOOR P.O, TRICHR BY ADV. MR. C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO. IV, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM 2. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), MATTANCHERRY. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 15847 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 24th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext.P1 notice issued by the 1st respondent under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act, whereby the goods transported by the petitioner in the vehicle bearing No. KL8 Q 9144 were detained on 8.5.10, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security to the extent as specified therein. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the insinuating circumstances noted in Ext.P1 are quite trivial in nature. The main dispute is in respect of alleged 'under valuation', referring to the actual quality of the wooden furniture transported. It is also stated that, immediately on receipt of Ext.P1, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P1 explanation, stating that, the omission to note the 'TIN' of the consignee is not correct, since the 'TIN' has very much been noted, though the 'last 3 digits' of the actual number has been omitted to be written. It is only an inadvertant mistake, not amounting to any culpable error or offence. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the vehicle as well as the goods can be released to the petitioner, on condition that, the petitioner satisfies 50% of the liability shown as W.P. (C) No. 15847 of 2010 : 2 : security deposit in Ext,P1 either in the form of 'cash' or 'bank guarantee' and executes a 'simple bond' for the balance amount; on which event, the vehicle as well as the goods detained as per Ext.P1 shall be released to the petitioner forthwith. This will be without prejudice to the rights and interests of the respondents to pursue adjudication proceedings, if any and the same shall be finalized in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, 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. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd