IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI W.P. No.26820/2017 (T – RES) BETWEEN:
1. DOOMANNA SOORLU AGED 55 YEARS, DODDALTHADAKA HOUSE GANGE ROAD, MADHUR GP KASARAGOD, KERALA-671124 2. SATHYAJITH FREDERIC AGED 54 YEARS, NELLIAT HOUSE, KUDLU MADHUR GP KASARGOD, KERALA-671124 3. HUSSAIN P S/O ABUBAKKAR, AGED 36 YEARS, OWNER OF THE GOODS VEHICLE PERUVADI HOUSE, MANIKRA POST, SULYA TALUK D.K.DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS (By Sri. K M SHIVAYOGISWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER MCP DUTY, (VIG-20), 3RD FLOOR 80 FEET ROAD, RAJENDRA NAGAR, KORAMANGALA, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560047 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (VIG-10) OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (VIG) VANUJYA THERIGE, KAARYALAYA-2, 3RD FLOOR, 80 FEET ROAD, RAJENDRA NAGAR, KORAMANGALA, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 047 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (VIG) VANIJYA THERIGE, KAARYALAYA-2, 3RD FLOOR, 80 FEET ROAD RAJENDRA NAGAR, KORAMANGALA, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 047 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES IN KARNATAKA, COMMERCIAL TAXES BUILDINGS, GANDHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 009 ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri.T.K. VEDAMURTHY, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY R-1 DATED 15.06.2017 VIDE ANNEX-D; DIRECT R-2 TO RELEASE THE GOODS IN TRANSIT HANDED OVER TO HIM BY R-1 AS PER THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS DRAWN BY HIM DATED 15.6.2017 VIDE ANNEX- D TO FIRST AND SECOND PETITIONER; AND DIRECT R-1 TO PAY THE DAMAGES FOR ILLEGAL DETENTION OF THE GOODS VEHICLE TO THE SECOND PETITIONER BEING THE OWNER OF THE GOODS VEHICLE BEARING No.KA 21 A 9734.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN `B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER In the instant writ petition, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:
a) Issue writ of certiorari or directions in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent bearing No.CTO/Vig-20/SVC/GCE-10/ 2017-18 dated 15.06.2017 vide Annexure-D.
(b) Issue writ of mandamus or directions in the nature of mandamus directing the second respondent to release the goods in transit handed over to him by the first respondent as per the impugned proceedings drawn by him bearing No.CTO/Vig-20/SVC/GCE-10/2017- 18 dated 15.06.2017 vide Annexure-D to the first – second petitioner.
(c) Issue writ of mandamus or directions in the nature of mandamus directing the first respondent to pay the damages for illegal detention of the goods vehicle to the second petitioner being the owner of the goods vehicle bearing No.KA 21 A 9734.
(d) Issue such other writ or orders as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case.
2. Petitioners are stated to have purchased granite slab from the consignor for their own use before 28.5.2017. On 29.5.2017, vehicle carrying goods – granite slabs of the petitioners was intercepted by the Check Post Officer of the respondents – Commercial Tax Department and proceeded in accordance with Section 53 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short `Act 2003’). When the proceedings were invoked under Section 53 of the Act, 2003, the Check Post Officer is in receipt of information from the vigilance of the Commercial Tax Department stating that the consignor-M/s.Siva Impex has to pay a sum of Rs.73,07,381/- with reference to TIN No.29681347841 to the department. Arising out of these factual aspects, the Checking Officer handed over the goods to Vigilance Department. Further on 15.6.2017, vehicle bearing Regn. No.KA 21 A 9734 was released and goods – granite slabs were with the Vigilance Department.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the petitioners had purchased granite slabs from consignor-M/s.Siva Impex. The scope of checking vehicle at check post along with goods is limited to the extent of Section 53 of the Act, 2003. No provision is provided for the Checking Officer to handover the goods to the vigilance or other department in order to meet some other transaction and balance amount/tax due to the department, the Checking Officer and Vigilance Officer cannot resort to this method of transmitting the seized goods to any another section. Respondents have not apprised this Court by pointing out any statutory provision that such transaction could be made among two sections of the Commercial Tax Department by invoking Section 53 of the Act, 2003. Officers of each wing of Commercial Tax Department are exercising quasi-judicial functions under a statute and officer is bound by it and there is no scope for deviating respective provisions of statute.
4. No doubt, the department may have good case on merits in respect of certain illegal activities alleged to have been committed by M/s.Siva Impex and the petitioner. Respondents/Commercial department shall have to resort for appropriate action/proceedings and they have no power to make such transmission of goods from one section to another section. Accordingly, Annexure-D dated 15.6.2017 is set aside reserving liberty to the Commercial Department to proceed in accordance with law against the petitioners as well as M/s.Siva Impex, if it is warranted Accordingly, writ petition stands allowed.
The concerned respondents are hereby directed to release the goods in accordance with law.
The above exercise shall be completed by the concerned Authority within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
At this juncture, learned counsel for the State on instructions submitted that the seized goods-granite slabs were stated to have been auctioned and disposed. Therefore, it is impracticable to return or release the seized goods-granite slabs. The respondents/ Commercial Tax Department is hereby directed to pay the value of the goods in terms of the invoice within a period of four weeks from today.
Bkm Sd/- JUDGE