The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 detention order wherein evasion was suspected on the ground that, the TIN number written in the delivery note is of another dealer, who also deals in rubber and that the purchase would have been effected from such dealer; which purchase is not being disclosed. The 1st respondent has demanded an amount of Rs.1,34,000/- as security deposit. The petitioner seeks release of the goods on the ground that, the TIN number entered in the delivery note was only a bonafide mistake and in fact the seal affixed in the delivery note would reveal the actual TIN number. In view of the allegations raised, this Court is of the opinion that, the petitioner cannot be permitted to take away the goods without providing sufficient security. 2. In such circumstance, there shall be a direction to release the goods on condition of the petitioner remitting 50% of W.P.(C) No. 13225 of 2014 2 the security deposit demanded and executing a simple bond without sureties for the balance amount. The proceedings if any against the petitioner shall be concluded within a period of six months from today.
With the above directions and observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB