Kerala High Court
By Adv.Sri.Harisankar vs By Adv.Sri.Harisankar V. Menon on 29 November, 2017
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 20TH POUSHA, 1939
WA.No. 2653 of 2017 IN WPC. 38291/2017
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 38291/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 29.11.2017
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER
M/S. STEEL INDIA CORPORATION
778/26 B, NEAR POOTHOTTA BUS STAND, POOTHOTTA, ERNAKULAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, VINI TEJU.
BY ADV.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. THE STATE TAX OFFICER
SPECIAL CIRCLE- III, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM 682 015.
2. ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER,
SQUAD NO.1, MATTANCHERRY AT ALUVA 682 121.
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-01-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
jg-12/1
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ.
-------------------------------------------
W.A.No.2653 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of January, 2018
J U D G M E N T
Vinod Chandran, J.
The petitioner in the Writ Petition was aggrieved with detention of goods. The goods transported were steel pipes and the invoice accompanying the goods shows a quantity of 163.108 MT. The goods available in the vehicle was only 14.780 MT. The petitioner explained that the entire goods were purchased by the petitioner, but lifted in different lots. The learned Single Judge, in that circumstances, directed release of the goods on furnishing Bank Guarantee. On furnishing the Bank Guarantee by the petitioner, goods were released, and now, even adjudication is complete.
This Writ Appeal is pressed only insofar as the finding of the learned Single Judge that there is a discrepancy in the quantity shown in the invoice. We do not see any reason to interfere with such finding, because actually there is such a discrepancy. WA 2653/17 -2- However, the discrepancy could be explained before the appropriate authorities and the explanation if found valid, the petitioner could be absolved of such liability also. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No order as to costs.
K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE ASHOK MENON JUDGE jg