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 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Polakulath Narayanan Ranai Medicity vs Commercial Tax Inspector

Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar

Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                               PRESENT:

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

              FRIDAY,THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/15TH KARTHIKA, 1937

                                  WP(C).No. 33726 of 2015 (M)
                                   ----------------------------------------


PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------

            POLAKULATH NARAYANAN RANAI MEDICITY,
            NO.35/273, POLAKULATH ROAD, MAMANGALAM,
            PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25, REPRESENTED BY
            THE MANAGING PARTNER SRI.P.N.KRISHNADAS.

            BY ADVS.SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN
                         SMT.V.P.SEENA DEVI

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

            COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR,
            COMMERCIALTAX CHECK POST, MUTHANGA,
            WAYANAD-673692.

            BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T.


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 06-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
            FOLLOWING:


PJ

WP(C).No. 33726 of 2015 (M)
----------------------------------------

                                            APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
-----------------------------------

P1:       COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE UNDER THE KVAT/CST ACT
          ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT
          CIRCLE-II, KALAMASSERY

P2:       COPY OF THE RETURN FOR 9/2015 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE BY
          THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER KVAT CIRCLE-II, KALAMASSERY.

P3:       COPY OF THE TAX INVOICE NO.27/15-16 DATED 19/10/15 ISSUED BY
          M/S.POWER & ENGINEERING (P) LTD., BANGALORE ISSUED TO PETITIONER

P4:       COPY OF THE E-CONSIGNMENT DECLARATION IN FORM 8F BEARING
          NO.32071310908/2015-16/759366, 22/10/15 ACCOMPANIED THE CONSIGNMENT

P5:       COPY OF THE TRANSACTION SLIP BEARING NO.320713/PA01/89678/2015
          UPLOADED ON 22/10/15 ACCOPANYING THE CONSIGNMENT

P6:       COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP IN FORM 16 BEARING
          NO.5595196138/2015 DATED 22/10/15 ACCOPANYING THE CONSIGNMENT

P7:       COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM 17 ABEARING NO.RO.1314/2015-16 DATED
          27/10/15 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT
-----------------------------------

          NIL.

                                                        / TRUE COPY /


                                                        P.S. TO JUDGE

PJ



              A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
       - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   W.P.(C) No.33726 of 2015
       - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Dated this the 6th day of November 2015

                            JUDGMENT

A consignment of Circuit breakers, that was being transported at the instance of the petitioner, was detained by the respondent. Ext.P7 is the detention notice issued to the petitioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the insistence of the respondent that the petitioner must pay the security deposit demanded in the detention notice as a condition for release of the goods and vehicle.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

(i) On a perusal of Ext.P7 notice, it is seen that the objection of the respondent is essentially that the consignment was not declared in the online 8F declaration and further that the consignee was not W.P.(c).No.33726 of 2015 : 2 : a registered dealer, and the online Form 16 was a photoshop version and not the downloaded, printed and signed version. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the online declaration in Form 8F was actually uploaded to the KVATIS Website and he produces Ext.P4 document in support of the said contention. It is also pointed out that the goods transported were covered by a valid invoice and further, the certificate of ownership in Form 16 was also available in the KVATIS Website and it showed that the goods were for the own use of the consignee.

Taking note of the said submission of counsel for the petitioner, and going through the documents that are produced along with the writ petition, I direct the respondent to release the goods and vehicle covered by Ext.P7 notice, to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner furnishing a simple bond without sureties for the security deposit demanded in Ext.P7 notice, before the respondent.

(ii) The respondent shall thereafter transmit the files to the adjudicating authority who shall adjudicate the matter and pass orders, after hearing the petitioner, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(iii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of this W.P.(c).No.33726 of 2015 : 3 : judgment and a copy of the writ petition before the respondent.

Sd/-

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/