Kerala High Court
WP(C)/30489/2012 of M/S.JOHNSON & JOHNSON LIMITED Vs THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR on 31 December 2012
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/10TH POUSHA 1934 WP(C).No. 30489 of 2012 (I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.JOHNSON & JOHNSON LIMITED, H M T ROAD, KALAMASSERY,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/10TH POUSHA 1934
WP(C).No. 30489 of 2012 (I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER:
-------------------
M/S.JOHNSON & JOHNSON LIMITED, H M T ROAD, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM-683 503, REPRESENTED BY MR. M.K PARAMESWARAN, AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.
BY ADVS.SRI.JOSEPH JERARD SAMSON RODRIGUES, SRI.ROVIN RODRIGUES.
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR,
DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD, MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 576. MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 576.
2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD, MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 576. DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD, MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 576.
3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (ON DUTY), COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST,WALAYAR-678 625, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST,WALAYAR-678 625, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR-678 625.
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. SUDHEESH KUMAR.
Prv.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C). NO.30489/2012-I:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE T I N CERTIFICATE.
EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE STOCK TRANSFER CHALLAN NO.MM120115 DATED 28.11.2012 FOR RS.67,54,497/-.DATED 28.11.2012 FOR RS.67,54,497/-.
EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF FORM NO.8F DECLARATION ISSUED BY THE CONSIGNOR,M/S JOHNSON&JOHNSON LTD., BHIWANDI.M/S JOHNSON&JOHNSON LTD., BHIWANDI.
EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE WAY BILL NO. 50190653516 DATED 28.11.2012 OF BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD.OF BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD.
EXT.P5:TRUE COPY OF THE PARCEL TRANSACTION RECEIPT IN FORM NO.8F DATED 01.12.2012, PREPARED BY THE TRANSPORTER M/S. BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD.DATED 01.12.2012, PREPARED BY THE TRANSPORTER M/S. BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD.
EXT.P6:TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.OR 899/12-13 DATED 01.12.2012 OF THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR.THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR.
EXT.P7:TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION LETTER DATED 14.12.2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Prv.
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.====================
W.P.(C) No. 30489 OF 2012====================
Dated this the 31[st] day of December 2012
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
A consignment of diagnostic equipments was detainedby the respondents under Ext.P6 notice under Section 47 (2)of the KVAT Act. Irregularities which led to the detention arementioned in that notice. On that basis, security deposit ofRs. 20,06,087/- is demanded. It is challenging the detentionof the consignment as above, this writ petition has been filed.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the certificate ofregistration under the KVAT Act was amended includingdiagnostic equipment also and that the equipments inquestion were covered by certificates of registration that wereissued under the KGST Act and CST Act as well. Therefore, itis argued that the petitioner did not commit any attempt toevade the tax and that the detention ordered as per Ext.P6 isillegal.
3. However, even the amendment to the certificate ofregistration under the KVAT Act, a copy of which is Ext.P2was effected only on 21-12-2012 whereas the detention inquestion was in 1-12-2012. That apart even in Form 8F, theconsignee is shown as Johnson & Johnson Ltd; Kottayam and not the petitioner. The other irregularities mentioned in Ext.P6also, prima facie shows that the detention was not unwarranted.
4. In such circumstances, acceptability or otherwise ofthe contentions raised by the petitioner are matters which are tobe decided only in the adjudication that is to be conducted by thecompetent authority. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petitiondirecting that the competent authority of the department shallcomplete the adjudication into the detention ordered by Ext.P6, asexpeditiously as possible on the production of a copy of thisjudgment.
5. In the meantime, if the petitioner furnishes Bank guarantee for double the tax calculated at the rate as applicable tomedical equipments and furnish bond without sureties for thebalance, if any, it will be open to the petitioner to seek the releaseof the consignment pending adjudication as ordered above.
6. The petitioner will produce a copy of the judgmentalong with a copy of this writ petition before the first respondentfor compliance.
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE
kvr/