High Court of KeralaWP(C)/28983/2015disposed of

P Jaya Thomas v. The Commercial Tax Inspector

2015-09-28Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/6TH ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 28983 of 2015 (W) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

--------------------- P. JAYA THOMAS W/O. P.V. THOMAS, AGED 38 YEARS RESIDING AT PULIKKOTTIL HOUSE NUT STREET, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE (PROPRIETRIX, STAR PLASTICS, MAHE).

BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENT :

------------------------ THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST BANGARA MANJESHWARAM, KASARAGOD PIN - 671 323.

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. LIJU V. STEPHEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 28983 of 2015 (W) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE INVOICE NO. 68 DATED 10.9.2015. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE TOKEN NO. 320000/2015-16/294753 DOWNLOADED FROM THE SYSTEM.

EXT.P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 47(2) OF THE KVAT ACT DATED 13.9.2015 DEMANDING SECURITY DEPOSIT OF RS. 1,36,800/- EXT.P4 COPY OF THE INVOICE NO. 69 DATED 12.9.2015.

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

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

........................................................ ......................................................... Dated this the 28th day of September, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Petitioner, who is a registered dealer under the KVAT Act is aggrieved by Ext.P3 notice issued to him detaining a consignment of HM Polly material of assorted size that was being transported at the instance of the petitioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the insistence of the respondent that the petitioner must pay the security deposit demanded in the detention notice as a condition for release of the goods and vehicle.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

(i) On a perusal of Ext.P3, it is seen that, the objection of the respondent is essentially that there was a possibility of the petitioner transporting the material that was intended for transportation to Mahe, to places in Kerala. There is however, no material relied upon to support the said suspicion by the respondents.

(ii) Counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is a registered dealer and the goods were in fact consigned to Mahe for use in Mahe for trading purposes. It is submitted that, there was no attempt at evasion of tax. Taking note of the said contentions of counsel for the petitioner, I direct the respondent to release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner furnishing a simple bond without surety for the security deposit amounts demanded in Ext.P3.

(iii) The respondent shall thereafter transmit the files to the adjudicating authority who shall adjudicate the matter and pass orders, after hearing the petitioner, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(iv) The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment and a copy of the writ petition before the respondent.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/