High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 08 KL CK 0249

N. Manoharan vs Commercial Tax Inspector, Commercial Tax Check Post, Walayar, 678624

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 22 August 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) . No. 20178 of 2012 (V)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 383 words

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.

APPENDIX

PETITIONER''S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1:

Copy of Registration Certificate of The Vehicle No.Kl- 43/D-5040

EXT.P2:

Copy of Agreement With Petitioner And Inland Clearance Depot, Singanallur

EXT.P3:

Copy of Declaration of The Petitioner

EXT.P4:

Copy of Certificate of Ownership In Form No.16

EXT.P5:

Copy of Declaration In Form No.8f

EXT.P6:

Copy of Notice Issued By The Respondent

EXT.P7:

Copy of Judgment in W.P.(C) No. 13711/2012 of This Honourable Court

RESPONDENT''S EXHIBITS:

NIL

1.

A crane bearing No. KL 43D 5040 covered by Ext.P1 Certificate of Registration was sought to be transported by the petitioner from Kochi to Coimbatore when it has been intercepted by the respondent issuing Ext.P6 notice u/s 47(2) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit as specified therein, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for immediate intervention. The case of the petitioner is that, above crane was actually being transported from Kochi to Coimbatore, in connection with the work contract awarded to the petitioner by the Central Warehousing Corporation as discernible from Ext.P2 agreement. It was accordingly, that the crane was taken in the vehicle bearing No.KL43C 7119 for executing the work pursuant to Ext.P2 contract, when the same was intercepted issuing Ext.P6 notice.

2.

The case of the petitioner is that he is only engaged in handling containers using cranes and other equipments. The petitioner had been transporting the crane covered to Coimbatore for honouring Ext.P2 agreement. The said transport was supported by Exts.P3 to P5 documents also. From the nature of the contract as seen from Ext.P2, there can''t be any liability under the VAT Act, submits the counsel.

3.

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that this is a matter which requires to be adjudicated by the concerned authority in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. However, if the petitioner furnishes Bank guarantee for 50% of the requisite amount and also executes a Simple Bond without sureties for the balance, the same shall be released to him forthwith. This shall be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the competent authority to complete the adjudication proceedings, which shall be finalized in accordance with the relevant provisions of law, as expeditiously as possible.

Writ petition is disposed of.