KARIYELIL PLYWOODS Vs. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a plywood manufacturer and a registered dealer under the KVAT and CST Act. Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner received Ext.P5 purchase order from a party situated outside the State in Vijayawada; pursuant to which the goods were sought to be supplied and transported in the vehicle bearing number AP30U 5979, on the strength of Ext.P1 invoice dated 23.6.2012. The advance tax in respect of the commodity was also satisfied as borne by Ext.P2 and the consignment was supported by Ext.P3 delivery note as well. In the course of transit, the goods were intercepted by the respondent on 24.6.2012 issuing Ext.P4 notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit to the extent as specified therein, which is under challenge.

(2.) THE leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the goods were also accompanied by Ext.P6 letter issued by the petitioner dated 23.6.2012, making clear that the particular item ordered by the purchaser was of the size 6 feet x 2.5 feet, among other items and since it was not readily available the petitioner sold the item having a higher measurement of '6 x 3' at the same rate and no higher amount has been collected from the buyer as revealed from Ext.P1 invoice. The explanation offered in this regard however was not accepted by the respondent, which hence is sought to be intercepted by this Court.