AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.—The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of detention of goods transported in the lorry bearing No. TN 30AT/1874 issuing Ext.P5 notice u/s 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein. According to the petitioner, it is nothing but an interstate sale and the role of the petitioner is only to install the swiping machines in the concerned premises, on instruction of the HPCL, who is the actual purchaser.
Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
The insinuating circumstances noted in Ext.P5 are in the following terms.
On verification of the document the following irregularities are noted:
The goods under transport is 150Nos.Swiping Machines (ad detailed via phone 9656194005) to be installed in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation''s Pumps. The goods are transported from New Delhi to Kochi using a despatch challan (330140001/28.1.14) and detailed as to use in transfer of right purpose. Here the goods are transported to HPCL hiding the TIN of consignee M/s. Electrobytes Technologies (India ) Pvt Ltd, Kochi. Since no purchase order is accompanied it cannot be ascertained whether this is a sale between HPCL & Electrobytes or the firm is authorised to collect only rental charges.
There is a supply and installation between HPCL and M/s. Electrobytes. The suspicion is assessed since the consignee M/s. Electrobytes is not using their Tin No. in the transaction. (Hiding the identity). The ownership of the goods is with M/s. Electrobytes and will be transferred only after installation. Hence the firm M/s. Electrobytes is hiding their identity either to pay (a) transfer of right to use tax (2) VAT (3) VAT under Contract Act. Hence notice is issued u/s. of VAT Act & Rules in higher rate.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to establish the facts and figures by producing all the relevant documents before the competent authority and that the prayer is only to cause the adjudication proceedings to be finalised within the shortest possible time.
After hearing both the sides and considering the particular facts and circumstances, the competent authority is directed to finalise the adjudication proceedings u/s 47(6) of the KVAT Act, at the earliest, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. It will be open for the petitioner to get the date of hearing, on production of copies of the judgment and the writ petition before the competent authority, so as to have the proceedings finalised in terms of the judgment passed by this Court.
The writ petition is disposed of.