Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

M/S. Aiswarya Agencies vs Intelligence Inspector on 19 October, 2014

Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon

Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon

       

  

   

 
 
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                            PRESENT:

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

             THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/1ST KARTHIKA, 1936

                                  WP(C).No. 27721 of 2014 (M)
                                      ----------------------------

PETITIONER :
-----------------------

            M/S. AISWARYA AGENCIES,
            MURIKKUMMOODU JUNCTION,K.P.ROAD,
            KAYAMKULAM, REP. BY PROPRIETOR SALIM.A.,
            S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN,AGED 39 YEARS.


               BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH

RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------

          1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR,
              SQUAD NO.IV, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
              MALAPPURAM, PERINTHALMANNA-679 322

          2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.IV,
              DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MALAPPURAM,
              PERINTHALMANNA-679 322

          3. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA CIRCLE,
              ALAPPUZHA-688 001

          4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.,
              TAXES DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001

          5. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE,
              DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, VIKAS BHAVAN,
             TRIVANDRUM-695 033.


               R1 TO R5 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 23-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
            FOLLOWING:


sts

WP(C).NO.27721/2014


                               APPENDIX


PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:


P1    COPY OF THE INVOICE NO.21 DATED 19/10/2014 ISSUED BY SRI.TIRUMALA
      EXPORTS, ONGOLE, ANDRA PRADESH.

P2    COPY OF THE NOTICE U/S. 47(2) OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT
      DATED 21/10/2014

P3    COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.18/2012 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.


RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:                 NIL




                                                   /TRUE COPY/


                                                   P.A.TO.JUDGE


sts



                  P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                    W.P.(C) No. 27721 of 2014
                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             Dated, this the 23rd day of October, 2014


                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and engaged in the business of granite and marble slabs. The grievance of the petitioner is that, while the petitioner was transporting the goods covered by Ext. P1 invoice in the vehicle bearing No. AP 20 TC 4199, it was intercepted by the first respondent issuing Ext. P2 notice under Section 47 (2) of the KVAT Act, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for immediate intervention.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that absolutely no offence has been committed by the petitioner and there was no attempt on the part of the petitioner to evade tax. It is stated that the goods were supported by all the necessary documents as contemplated under Section 46 (3) of the KVAT Act. The reason for detention, as shown in Ext. P2 notice, is in the following terms : W.P.(C) No. 27721 of 2014 : 2 :

"The vehicle with goods checked at CTCP Walayar on 21.10.2014. On physical verification, it is found that an excess quantity of 300 sq. ft. of granite slabs in the vehicle after deducting sufficient quantity towards cracks and uneven edges as per instructions contained in the Circular No. 18/2012 of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Trivandrum Quantity as per accompanied documents = 2844.97 sq.ft Quantity after physical verification Excess= 3144.97 sq.ft Excess Quantity = 300 sq.ft.
Hence the SD demanded on the estimated value of excess quantity of 300 Sq.ft. Granite slabs. ."

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the security demanded is on the higher side and that the 1st respondent has not effected the deduction as per the Circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.

4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that this is a matter which requires to be finalized by way of adjudication proceedings. The security deposit demanded is only Rs. 8,700/-. The goods shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, on satisfaction of the amount demanded vide Ext. P2 W.P.(C) No. 27721 of 2014 : 3 : notice under protest. It is made clear that the amount so deposited by the petitioner will be subject to orders to be passed by the adjudication authority, 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 copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd