IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 29221 of 2010(C)
1. M/S.PERCEPT ENGINEERS PVT.LTD,2NS FLOOR
... Petitioner
Vs
1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,SQUAD NO.IV,
... Respondent
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER(WORKS
3. STATE OF KERALA,BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.,
4. THE COMMISSIONER,DEPARTMENT OF
For Petitioner :SRI.C.K.SREEJITH
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :23/09/2010
O R D E R
C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
W.P.(C) No. 29221 of 2010
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
Petitioner who claims to be a works contractor is
aggrieved by detention of goods under transport effected on
issuance of Ext.P3 notice under section 47(2) of the Kerala
Value Added Tax Act, 2003.
2. According to the petitioner, the goods transported
are leak proof materials, which were purchased from Delhi
on the strength of Ext.P2 invoice. On a perusal of Ext.P3
notice, it is revealed that the goods were detained for the
reason that the ‘TIN’ particulars mentioned in the invoice
were not correct and the petitioner was not authorized to
purchase the goods from outside the State on payment of
concessional rate of C.S.T., as the item was not included in
the registration certificate.
3. According to the petitioner, the discrepancy in
noting the ‘TIN’ particulars was due to an inadvertent
mistake on the part of the consignor. It is also contended
W.P.(C) No. 29221/2010 2
that the particular item transported is the material included
in the registration certificate.
4. Learned Government Pleader on instructions
submitted that genuineness of the transport as well as the
evasion of tax is suspected and the petitioner is liable to be
imposed with penalty.
5. The question whether there was any attempt in
evasion of payment of tax, is a matter which need be
decided on finalizing the enquiry . I am of the opinion that
the goods need not be detained pending finalization of the
enquiry, if the petitioner produces proper security for the
amount demanded under Ext.P3.
6. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is
disposed of directing the 1st respondent to release the goods
detained under Ext.P3, along with the vehicle, on the
petitioner furnishing of bank guarantee for 50% of the
amount of security demanded under Ext.P3 and on
furnishing security bond without sureties, for the balance
amount.
W.P.(C) No. 29221/2010 3
7. The competent authority will finalize the enquiry
after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner,
at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of six
weeks form the date of release of the goods.
C. K. ABDUL REHIM,
JUDGE.
mn.