The petitioner who is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, is aggrieved of the detention of goods brought by the petitioner (on the strength of Exts.P5 & P5(a)), by the 2nd respondent/Commercial Tax Inspector issuing Ext.P6 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit as specified therein.
2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits on instructions and with reference to the materials on record that, the impugned notice was issued on noting the defect as mentioned in Ext.P6 in the following terms:
“The goods are being transported on the strength of a Certificate of Onwership in form No.16 by a firm named M/s.River Bourne Centre Pvt. Ltd, Tripunitura. But on scrutiny of the accompanying running bill (payment term noted in the running bill) it is ascertained that M/s.River Bourne Center Pvt. Ltd, Tripunithura awarded a work of supply and installation of wooden flooring for Badminton Court to M/s. Sundek Sports Systems, Mumbai. But neither is not registered under KVAT Act. Hence the non-liability to pay tax under KVAT is not proved, as there is a transfer of goods in the course of work contract within WP(c). No.30888 of 2014 2 the state. More over, the person authenticated, is not the consignee but only a work awarder.”
3. Ext.P5 invoice refers to supply and installation of wooden flooring for Badminton Court. On 21.11.14, this Court directed the petitioner to produce a copy of the agreement executed in this regard. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits on instructions, that no agreement has been executed, but for a quotation obtained; a copy of which is placed for perusal of this Court. On going through the contents and the materials on record, this Court finds that this is a matter which requires to be finalized by way of adjudication proceedings under Section 47(6) of the KVAT Act. But, for that reason, the goods need not be detained and the same shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, on satisfying 25% of the security deposit demanded vide Ext. P6 and on executing a 'simple bond' without sureties for the balance amount. This however shall be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondent/competent authority to proceed with 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 WP(c). No.30888 of 2014 3 copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the respondent for further steps.
Writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Pn