Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE1T DAY OF APRIL201411TH CHAITHRA, 1936 WP(C).No. 9263 of 2014 (G) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. TCI FREIGHT (A DIVISION OF TRANSPORT CORPORATION OF INDIA), REPRESENTED BY ITS AREA MANAGER V.S.POONIA, S/O. MAHENDRA SINGH POONIA, AGED40YEARS,TCI HOUSE, 32/299A, SOUTH KALAMASSERY P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 104.
2. PRASHANT JAIN, DIRECTOR, MANEESH UDYOG HEAT EXCHANGERS PVT. LTD., BHEL ANCILIARY ESTATE, RANIPUR, HARIDWAR, UTTARAKHAND STATE. BY ADVS.SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARYTO COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD-678 624.
3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (EM)GENERATION CIRCLE, MOOLAMATTOM, IDUKKI-685 589. R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0104-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WP(C).No. 9263 of 2014 (G) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: --------------------------------------- P1 : COPY OF INVOICE DTD.16.10.2013 ISSUED BY THE2D PETITIONER. P2 : COPY OF LORRY RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE1T PETITIONER TRANSPORTER DTD.16.10.2013. P3 : COPY OF NOTICE DTD.24.12.2013 ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF LETTER DTD. 22/01/14 ISSUED BY THE3D RESPONDENT TO THE2D PETITIONER. P5: COPY OF LETTER DTD. 04/03/14 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONERS. P6: COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE1T PETITIONER - TRANSPORTER TO THE2D RESPONDENT DTD. 12/03/14. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------------ N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.9263 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of April, 2014
JUDGMENT
The goods transported by the petitioners on the strength of photocopy of Ext.P1 invoice were intercepted in the course of transit by the second respondent issuing Ext.P3 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent of Rs.1,74,000/-, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the writ petition for immediate release stating that the goods are being transported to meet the immediate requirement of the Electricity Board represented by the third respondent.
2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the goods were not transported on the strength of valid documents as contemplated under Section 46 (3) of the KVAT Act, but for a photocopy of the invoice which was not liable to be accepted. It was in the said circumstance, that the vehicle was intercepted issuing Ext.P3 notice. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is only a transporter and the second respondent is the consignor. The goods were actually transported on the strength W.P.(C)No.9263 of 2014 -2- of valid documents, which was shown at various check posts and in the course of transit, the driver of the concerned vehicle somehow lost the original and hence the detention.
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 vehicle and the goods need not be detained and the same shall be released to the petitioners forthwith, on furnishing bank guarantee for the requisite amount. This however shall be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the competent authority to proceed with the adjudication proceedings, which shall be finalized in accordance with law, after giving notice to the petitioners concerned, 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 concerned respondent for further steps. Writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE shg/