Skip to content


Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
CourtKerala High Court
Decided On
Judge
AppellantAkzo Nobel India Limited
RespondentThe Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Excerpt:
.....on the same day delivered the following: wpc no.2209/13 appendix petitioner's exhibits exhibit-p1: true copy of the certificate of registration of the petitioner. exhibit-p2: true copy of the stock transfer invoice dated 8 1.2013 in respect of lorry no.kl-2x-7200. exhibit-p2(a): true copy of the stock transfer invoice dated 8 1.2013 in respect of lorry no.kl-17e-1263. exhibit-p3: true copy of the central excise challan-cum-invoice no.03134. exhibit-p3(a): true copy of the central excise challan-cum-invoice no.03148. exhibit-p4: true copy of the excise gate pass calculation sheet dated 8 1.2013 in respect of ext.p3 invoice. exhibit-p4(a): true copy of the excise gate pass calculation sheet dated 8 1.2013 in respect of ext.p3(a) invoice. exhibit-p5: true copy of the lorry receipt dated 8.....
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2013 3RD MAGHA 193 WP(C).No. 2209 of 2013 (A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- AKZO NOBEL INDIA LIMITED MENATHOTTAM WAREHOUSE,T.C.NO.31/1738 VALLAKADAVU.P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695508. REPRESENTED BY IT'S ACCOUNTS EXECUTIVE SRI.K.MURALI. BY ADVS.SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR SMT.P.LISSY JOSE. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES COMMISSIONERATE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN 695001.

2. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR COMMERCIAL TAXES,SQUAD NO.I,KOLLAM-691021 CAMP AT ARYANKAVU,KOLLAM. BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.2209/13 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE STOCK TRANSFER INVOICE DATED 8 1.2013 IN RESPECT OF LORRY NO.KL-2X-7200. EXHIBIT-P2(a): TRUE COPY OF THE STOCK TRANSFER INVOICE DATED 8 1.2013 IN RESPECT OF LORRY NO.KL-17E-1263. EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE CHALLAN-CUM-INVOICE NO.03134. EXHIBIT-P3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE CHALLAN-CUM-INVOICE NO.03148. EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE EXCISE GATE PASS CALCULATION SHEET DATED 8 1.2013 IN RESPECT OF EXT.P3 INVOICE. EXHIBIT-P4(a): TRUE COPY OF THE EXCISE GATE PASS CALCULATION SHEET DATED 8 1.2013 IN RESPECT OF EXT.P3(a) INVOICE. EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LORRY RECEIPT DATED 8 1.2013 OF LORRY NO.KL-2X-7200. EXHIBIT-P5(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LORRY RECEIPT DATED 8 1.2013 OF LORRY NO.KL-17E-1263. EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.OR 1117/12-13 DATED 12 1.2013 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P6(a): TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.OR 1116/12-13 DATED 12 1.2013 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P7: TRUE COPY OF PAGE NOS.1,2 & 6 OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.49/2008 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. //True Copy// PA to Judge Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

================ W.P.(C) NO. 2209 OF 201.=================== Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2013 JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a dealer registered under the KVAT Act and the CST Act. In this writ petition, they challenge Exts.P6 and P6(a) notices detaining two consignments of paints. The reason mentioned in both the notices is one of undervaluation and the consequent attempt to evade tax. However, explanation of the petitioner is that the officer has adopted the gross value instead of the assessable value. The correctness of this allegation is a matter which is to be verified by the competent authority in the course of the adjudication to be conducted.

2. Therefore, I direct that the adjudication in terms of the statutory provisions be conducted in accordance with law, and that, in the meanwhile, I direct that the goods detained by Exts.P6 and P6(a) be released to the petitioner on their executing a bond without sureties for the security demanded therein. It is made clear that, before the goods are released as directed above, it will be open to the 2nd respondent to verify whether the MRP and the WPC.No.2209/13 :2 : gross value are one and the same. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //