Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

M/S.Cheerans Structurals Vs. the Intelligence Inspector

M/S.Cheerans Structurals vs The Intelligence Inspector

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 21, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1128886

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Sales Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Sales Tax

Key legal issue
Sales Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M/S.Cheerans Structurals

Respondent

The Intelligence Inspector

Excerpt

.....as specified therein which made the petitioner to approach this court by filing the writ petition.2. the learned government pleader appearing for the respondent submits on instructions and with reference to the materials on record that, on verification it is seen that consignee, the work contractor is not filed the quarterly return for the quarter ending 31st december, 2013 even after the stipulated time is over, a clear violation of statutory provisions contained in section 20 of the kvat act, 2003 and rule 24 of kvat rule, 2005 for which analysis provided under circular 5 of 2013 is warranted and hence the goods were detained in tune with the relevant provisions of law, leading to the impugned notices, w.p.c. no.5256 of2014-2- doubting evasion of tax, and demanding security deposit.3. 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 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.p3 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 copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. the writ petition is disposed of. p.r. ramachandra menon, judge. sp

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE21T DAY OF FEBRUARY20142ND PHALGUNA, 1935 WP(C).No. 5256 of 2014 (F) --------------------------- PETITIONER : ---------- M/S.CHEERANS STRUCTURALS, ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS CHALISSERY P.O., PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SHIRLON MATHEW. BY ADVS.SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.V.K.SHAMUSUDHEEN RESPONDENT : ---------- THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR SQUAD NO. I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM - 691002. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2102-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BP WP(C).No. 5256 of 2014 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : P1: COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DT179/2007. P2: COPY OF THE INVOICE NO.SCS - 7515 DT192/2014. P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. OR. 1609/2013-14 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDERR SECTION472) AND (4) OF THE KVAT ACT DT202/2014. p4: COPY OF THE RETURN FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM110/2013 TO3112/2013 DT202/2014. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE BP P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.C. No.5256 OF2014--------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of February, 2014. JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved of the detention of goods brought by him (on the strength of Ext.P2 Invoice), which was detained by the respondent/Intelligence Inspector issuing Ext.P3 notice under Section 47(2) and Section 47(4) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit as specified therein which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the writ petition.

2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submits on instructions and with reference to the materials on record that, on verification it is seen that consignee, the work contractor is not filed the quarterly return for the quarter ending 31st December, 2013 even after the stipulated time is over, a clear violation of statutory provisions contained in Section 20 of the KVAT Act, 2003 and Rule 24 of KVAT Rule, 2005 for which analysis provided under Circular 5 of 2013 is warranted and hence the goods were detained in tune with the relevant provisions of law, leading to the impugned notices, W.P.C. No.5256 OF2014-2- doubting evasion of tax, and demanding security deposit.

3. 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 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.P3 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 copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. The writ petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. sp

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial