The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and engaged in civil contract works. In connection with execution of a contract work, some goods were sought to be transported in the vehicle bearing No. KL17 E 8819. In the course of transit, they were intercepted by the first 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. 31721 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. P1, is in the following terms:
“The vehicle with goods were intercepted at Kalamassery on 24.11.14. On verification of the accompanying Delivery Note, it is found that the signature portion is not verified. Since the digital signature is not .verified the Delivery not is not valid. Hence genuineness of the documents, transportation and evasion of payment of tax is suspected and so SD demanded accordingly”
4. Considering the facts and circumstances, particularly the materials on record, this Court is of the view that the actual factual particulars can be unearthed 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. P1. This will be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondents 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.
W.P.(C) No. 31721 of 2014 : 3 :
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)