The petitioner is aggrieved of the detention of goods brought by him (on the strength of Ext.P2), which was detained by the Officers of the Motor Vehicle Department along with goods belonging to the petitioner at Kanjikode and handed over the vehicle, along with the consignment to the 1st respondent/The Intelligence Inspector, who issued Ext.P1 notice under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit as specified therein. This made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the writ petition.
2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits on instructions and with reference to the materials on record that, due to the defects noted as per Ext.P1, the goods had to be detained in tune with the relevant provisions of law, doubting evasion of tax, and demanding security deposit.
3. The reasons for detention shown are in the following terms:
W.P.(C) No.32005 of 2014 2 “The vehicle with goods handed over by Motor Vehicle Department at 16.30 hrs. on 26.11.2014. As per their statement the vehicle with goods intercepted at 14.00 hrs. at Maniyeri, Kanjikode 500 mtrs. away from M/s. Steel Track, Kanjikode, Palakkad. At the time of interception, the documents accompanied along with the goods were Invoice raised from M/s. Oshun Exim, Coimbatore to M/s. S.P. Steels, Ottappalam. The RTO authorities handed over the goods at 16.30 hrs. with suspicion that the goods are being transported to local companies without issuing subsequent sale bill. The vehicle with goods should not have been reached near M/s. Steel Track with the bill addressed to M/s. S.P. Steels, Ottappalam. But for the interception of RTO authorities the goods would have been delivered to local destination. Subsequently after getting information that the vehicle has been handed over to Commercial Taxes authorities, M/s. S.P. Steels, Ottappalam, raised on-line Delivery note and invoice in the name of M/s. Steel Track, Kanjikode at 16.31 hrs. This reveals their malicious attempt to evade subsequent sale and thereby evading tax which is due to State Exchequer. Hence security deposit is demanded for the transported goods estimating value @ Rs.7,00,000/-.”
4. After hearing both the sides, 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 W.P.(C) No.32005 of 2014 3 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.P1 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 first 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 copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the second respondent, for further steps.
The writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
sp