TTK PRESTIGE LIMITED Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has transported certain electrical goods in the vehicle bearing No.KA-50-3378 on the strength of Ext.P2 and P3 invoices supported by Ext.P4 declarations in Form 8F. When the goods were in transit, it was intercepted by the first respondent on 29.05.2012 issuing Ext.P5 notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, observing that there was a wrong declaration in From 8F in so far as, it has been mentioned that the commodity was electrical goods "coming under the 3rd schedule". Noting that there is vast difference between the rate of tax in respect of goods coming under the 3rd schedule and those included else where, attracting a higher rate of tax, security was demanded to the extent as specified therein.

(2.) PURSUANT to the opportunity given to show cause, the petitioner immediately filed Ext.P7 revised declaration correcting the entry as electrical goods "not coming under 3rd schedule". The case of the petitioner is that, it was an inadvertant mistake occurred in the head office at Chennai, where the word 'not' happened to be omitted. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, this however does not create any bar with regard to the transport, as the actual rate of tax is to be applied to the transaction is a matter to be decided by the second respondent, at the appropriate stage and that the mistake in not showing the word 'not' in the declaration by itself does not lead to any presumption that there was any attempt to evade tax.

(3.) THIS however shall be without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondents to pursue the adjudication proceedings, which shall be finalized in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. Writ petition is disposed of.