The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and engaged in the business of kitchen appliances. In the course of business operation, the petitioner sent a consignment covered Ext. P2 invoice from Chennai. While the goods were being transported, they were intercepted by the second respondent issuing Ext. P1 notice under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for immediate intervention.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that absolutely no offence has been committed by the petitioner and there was no attempt on the part of the petitioner to evade tax. It is stated that the objections raised by the respondents are of technical in nature.
W.P.(C) No. 29385 of 2014 : 2 :
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that the goods were detained doubting genuineness of the documents accompanied the transaction. The reason for detention, as shown in Ext. P3, is in the following terms:
“Goods verified and checked at Parveen tacks, EKM on 02.11.2014 at 10.55 hrs. On verification of the KVATis and documents accompanied, it is noticed that the consignee is not authorised to effect interstate purchase of foods referred in column No.10 above u/s 8 (3) (b) of CST Act 1956. Hence security deposit demanded.”
4. Considering the facts and circumstances, particularly the materials on record including Ext. P1 Certificate of Registration, this Court is of the prima facie view that insinuation now levelled against the petitioner may not be correct. However, the actual factual particulars can be unearthed only in the course of adjudication proceedings. But for that reason, the goods need not be detained any further and the same shall be released to the petitioner, on condition that, the petitioner furnishes a 'Simple Bond' without sureties for the amount shown in Ext. P3. This will be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondents W.P.(C) No. 29385 of 2014 : 3 :
to pursue the adjudication proceedings, which shall be finalized in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
kmd Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)