High Court of KeralaWP(C)/19498/2015disposed of

Noufal v. Commercial Taxes Inspector

2015-06-30Honourable Mr. Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/9TH ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 19498 of 2015 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

--------------------- NOUFAL T.P., PROPRIETOR, M/S. PACHI STORES KANHIRODE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI SRI.V.A.SATHEESH RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. COMMERCIAL TAXES INSPECTOR COMMERCIAL TAXES CHECK POST BAVALI P.O., WYNAD DISTRICT - 681 283.

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANNUR - 670 001.

3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 19498 of 2015 (J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE INVOICE ISSUED FROM SIDDA GANGA CEMENTS PVT. LTD DATED 22-6-2015.

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25-6-2015.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.19498 of 2015 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P2 notice. Ext.P2 notice, as seen from the notice itself, is an alert message given by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Kannur as the petitioner found to be in the habit of declaring less quantity of transported cement.

2. Today the learned Government Pleader placed before me the notice issued under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has been directed to furnish security deposit of ₹`29,000/- and also to pay penalty of `29,000/- under Section 69(1). As far as the penalty is concerned, it can be imposed against the petitioner only after adjudication. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that, the vehicle and goods shall be released to the petitioner on depositing an amount of `29,000/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand only) demanded for security and executing a simple bond without sureties. The petitioner shall also co-operate with the enquiry under Section 69(1).

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.