M/S Mountain Valley Spring India P Ltd v. The State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/4TH KARTHIKA, 1937Q WP(C).No. 32446 of 2015 (E) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :
---------------------- M/S MOUNTAIN VALLEY SPRING INDIA P LTD, G-20, LULU MALL SHOP, EDAPPALLY POST, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 024, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, MR.SURENDRA RAWATH.
BY ADV. SMT.K.LATHA RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, MUTHANGA-678 103
3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682 030 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LILLY.K.T THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).NO.32446/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT OF RENT DATED 09 JUNE 2015 ENTERED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY WITH LULU INTERNATIONAL SHOPPING MALL PRIVATE LIMITED P2 COPY OF THE FORM NO.8F DATED 20TH OCTOBER 2015 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY P2(A) COPY OF THE FORM NO.16 DATED 20TH OCTOBER 2015 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY P3 COPY OF THE DETENTION NOTICE OR NO.1294/2015-16 DATED 25/10/2015 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT U/S 47(2) OF THE KVAT ACT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
=========================================== ===================================================== Dated this the 26th day of October, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 notice issued to him detaining a consignment of electrical goods and furniture, 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 appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
3.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:
(i) On a perusal of Ext.P3 notice, it is seen that the objection of the respondent is essentially that while the goods were accompanied by a valid invoice and has also an 8F declaration, the Form-16 certificate that was furnished by the petitioner did not carry the
-2signature of the authorised officer as per Circular No.3/2015. Counsel for the petitioner submits that although the on-line declaration in Form-16 was uploaded on the KVATIS website and the goods were accompanied by the valid invoice as also an 8F declaration, the petitioner could not obtain a Form16 duly signed by the authorised person. It is pointed out that the goods in question were required for furnishing the shop room, that was to be set up by the petitioner in a shopping complex. Taking note of the said submission, and finding that the transportation of the goods was otherwise in order, I direct the 2nd respondent to release the goods and the vehicle covered by the detention notice, to the petitioner, on his executing a simple bond without sureties for the security deposit amount demanded in the notice, before the 2nd respondent.
(ii) The 2nd 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.
(iii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment and a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /26.10.15
-3-