CHIRAKEKKARAN GLASS HOUSE P LTD Vs. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax and the Central Sales Tax Act. THE business premises of the petitioner was searched by an intelligence team of the Taxes Department as per a warrant issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, on 20.3.2010. Certain documents were recovered. Pursuant to the seizure, Ext.P3 notice under Section 67(3) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was issued proposing to impose a penalty on the petitioner. THE petitioner filed an application for release of the seized documents to enable the petitioner to file objections to Ext.P3 notice. According to the petitioner, the same was rejected by the assessing authority by Ext.P6. THE petitioner contends that in view of sub section (6) of Section 44 of the KVAT Act, the respondent has no authority to detain the seized recodes beyond a period of one year from the date of seizure. THE petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs;

(2.) THE learned Government Pleader submits that the mandate of Section 44(6) of the Act for return of seized records is applicable only in cases where the respondent does not intend to initiate prosecution proceedings on the basis of those documents. In this case, the respondent intends to initiate prosecution proceedings, is the contention raised. It is further pointed out that in Ext.P6 itself it is clearly stated that as requested, the petitioner was afforded an opportunity to obtain copies of the documents referred to in the penalty notice or any other relevant documents or to take extracts from the relevant documents, which facility the petitioner has not availed of.