Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
Marykutty vs The Commercial Tax Inspector on 15 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21915 of 2010(L)


1. MARYKUTTY, W/O.DR.K.J.SEBASTIAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :15/07/2010

 O R D E R
               P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                    W.P.(C) No. 21915 of 2010 L
             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is conducting a ‘play school’ for children

below four years, under the name and style of Euro Kids, a

franchisee of M/s.Euro Kids International Limited, Mumbai. The

petitioner purchased certain goods including ‘toys’ and ‘play books’

from the concerned dealer and the goods were being transported

for ‘own use’, for the benefit of the children in the school at Palai.

When the goods were being transported through parcel service,

they were intercepted on 30-03-2010. The genuineness of the

purpose of the transport and the chance of evasion of tax were

doubted, leading to the issuance of Ext.P1 notice dated 30-03-

2010 under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act,

demanding security deposit as to the extent as specified therein.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, eventhough the

factual position was sought to be explained with reference to

Ext.P2 reply, enclosing copies of Form-16 certificate of ownership

and such other materials, including the agreement dated 01-04-

2010 in respect of the lease of the building concerned for running

WPC.21915/2010
: 2 :

the school and thereafter Ext.P3 representation dated 08-06-2010,

they have not been properly appreciated by the first respondent.

The detention is still continuing, adversely affecting the rights and

liberties of the petitioner and the betterment of the children

concerned, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

3. Heard learned Government Pleader as well, who

submits that the matter requires to be adjudicated to ascertain the

truth and that taking note of the fact that the detention is

continuing from 30-03-2010, it can be finalised, giving top priority,

within two weeks.

4. In the above circumstances, the respondents shall

cause finalisation of the adjudication proceedings pursuant to

Ext.P1 in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE)
aks


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

94 queries in 0.486 seconds.