IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19161 of 2008(F)
1. M/S LIGHTING SYSTEMS & SOLUTIONS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR,
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(KVAT),
For Petitioner :SRI.BOBBY JOHN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :02/07/2008
O R D E R
K.M. JOSEPH, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No. 19161 OF 2008 F
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner challenges Ext.P3. Ext.P3 is a notice
issued under section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax
Act. The reason for detention is as follows.
“The consignment is not accompanied
by the original or duplicate of the invoice.
Hence, there is every possibility of
transporting other consignments using the
same documents.”
2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Government Pleader. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the original invoice was produced after
some time of the detention. The value of the goods estimated
is Rs.26,89,791/- as against Rs.17,17,000/- shown in the
invoice, it is submitted.
3. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, I
am of the view that the petitioner may not be entitled to get an
WPC.19161/08
: 2 :
unconditional order releasing the goods without insisting
payment of the amount demanded. But, at the same time, the
goods can be ordered to be released on the petitioner
furnishing bank guarantee for the sum demanded in Ext.P3
notice. Therefore, the goods will be released to the petitioner
upon the petitioner producing bank guarantee to the
satisfaction of the 1st respondent for the sum demanded in
Ext.P3. It is further ordered that the adjudicatory process will
be completed as early as possible, at any rate, within a period
of six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this
judgment.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)
aks
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE