K SELVAM Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the Ext. P4 notice dated 8.7.2012 issued by the first respondent whereby the vehicle No. TN- 28-AF ( wrongly typed as AR in Ext.P4) 4313, has been detained at the check post. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner, who is engaged in transporting live chicken from Tamil Nadu to Kerala has necessarily to take empty weight of the vehicle with the cages at the check post. The goods from Tamil Nadu have to be brought in/ transported within 7 days, in tune with the relevant provisions of law. Because of some unfortunate delay, if the procurement cannot be effected within seven days, the empty vehicle has again to be weighed with cages and the matter has to be pursued further, again. On an earlier instance, when the empty vehicle was caused to be detained in the process as aforesaid, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing WP(C) No. 3302/2012, which culminated in Exhibit P1 judgment, whereby it was categorically held by this Court that the respondents were not justified in placing reliance on the proviso to Section 47(3) to have detained the vehicle and accordingly, the vehicle was ordered to be released, however, without prejudice to the proceedings under Section 67 of the Act.

(2.) PURSUANT to the further steps taken, the concerned authority issued notice under Section 67 of the Act, to which a detailed explanation was submitted as borne by Ext.P2. Thereafter, the matter was finalised and penalty was imposed upon the petitioner as per Ext.P3 order dated 26/04/2012. Being aggrieved of the said order, the petitioner availed the statutory remedy by filing an appeal along with the interlocutory application for stay. Apprehending coercive proceedings, W.P.(C)NO.16242/2012 was filed, which was disposed of as per Ext.P5 judgment dated 13/07/2012, whereby the appellate authority was directed to consider and pass appropriate orders in the I.A. for stay, simultaneously intercepting the coercive proceedings till such time. This being the position, the stay is very well in existence and the issuance of Ext.P4 is liable to be intercepted by this Court, submits the learned counsel.

(3.) HEARD the learned Government Pleader as well.