IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25896 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.N.SUMESH, SOORYA TRADERS,KAMBRATHCHELLA, CHITTUR,PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.T.G.ABHILASH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAXES,SQUAD NO.IV,PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.25896 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner is approaching this Court challenging detention of two Trucks loaded with goods transported from the business place of the petitioner, pursuant to issuance of Exts.P11 and P12 notices by the respondent, under Section 47(2) and 69 (1) of the KVAT Act. According to the petitioner the goods covered under Exts.P2 and P3 invoices were brought on inter- state purchase, from Tamil Nadu. Those goods were brought to the business place of the petitioner in the two vehicles which are now intercepted, after declaring the goods at the border check post. From his place of business the petitioner loaded some additional goods, out of the stock held at his place of business, intended for supply in the course of re-sale to various registered dealers. The goods loaded in both the vehicles are covered by Exts.P4 to P10 invoices, which are drawn in the name of various registered dealers. According to the petitioner when the vehicles were about to start from the premises after loading the goods, the Circle Inspector of Police, Kollangode intercepted and took all the documents into custody. It is submitted that a W.P.(C).25896/09 2 mahazar was prepared and signature of the drivers were obtained, and subsequently the vehicle along with the goods were handed over to the respondent. Further, the respondent had detained the same on issuing Ext.P11 and P12 notices, is the contention. 2. Heard learned Government Pleader, who on the basis of instructions submitted that the vehicles were intercepted by the Circle Inspector of Police at a place called Kamprath chella near Govindapuram and on inspection by the Circle Inspector it was noticed that the vehicles are loaded with goods in excess of Ext.P2 and P3 invoices. The allegation of the petitioner that the goods loaded in the vehicles were accompanied by Ext.P4 to P10 invoices, is denied. Since it is found that the goods loaded in the vehicles are in excess of the quantity covered under the invoices (Ext.P2 and P3) the Circle Inspector had informed the respondent and the vehicles were seized and handed over to the respondent. 3. It is noticed from Exts.P11 and P12 that the detention is on the grounds that, there is excess quantity seen loaded in the vehicles which was intercepted at a place after the border check post and therefore evasion on payment of tax is suspected. Further the additional goods was seen transported without proper documents. Therefore security for release of the goods is W.P.(C).25896/09 3 demanded both under the provisions of Section 47(2) and 69(1) of the KVAT Act. 4. Having considered rival contentions I am of the opinion that the question whether there was attempt at evasion of payment of tax is a matter which has to be decided on the basis of various materials and documents, in process of adjudication to be completed under Sections 47 and 69 of the KVAT Act. It may not be proper for this Court to enter on any finding regarding merits, pending disposal of the adjudication. However, having considered the facts, I am of the opinion that necessary directions can be issued with respect to release of the goods pending finalisation of such adjudication on imposing adequate conditions. 5. In the result the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to release the goods along with the vehicles detained under Exts.P11 and P12 notices on the petitioner furnishing Bank guarantee for double the amount of tax due on the excess quantity of goods found in both the vehicles, than what is covered under Ext.P3 and P4 invoices, both under Section 47 and 69 of the KVAT Act. It is made clear that the respondent is at liberty to make adequate measures with respect to release of the vehicles, by making necessary endorsement in the Registration Certificates, since proceedings under Section 69 W.P.(C).25896/09 4 has already been initiated. The competent adjudicating authority is directed to complete the process of adjudication after affording opportunity to the petitioner as well as to the owners of the vehicles as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of release of the goods. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb