AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Siri Jagan
The first petitioner is a transporting agency, who is using a vehicle owned by the second petitioner for their business. They have transported certain goods on behalf of a customer which were detained by the respondent on allegation of attempt to evade tax as per Exts.P5 and P6. The petitioners'' grievance in this writ petition is that neither the consignor nor the consignee is taking steps to get the goods and vehicle released. The petitioners submit that no proceedings have been initiated in respect of the vehicle and therefore, the petitioners are entitled to release of the vehicle.
I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. Exts.P5 and P6 do not reveal any intention to proceed against the vehicle. As such, there cannot be any objection to the respondent to release the vehicle on execution of a bond for the value of the vehicle.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioners shall see that the goods carried in the vehicle are unloaded at their expense. Thereafter, they shall together execute a simple bond without sureties for the value of the vehicle. On execution of the said bond, the vehicle shall be released to the petitioners, after ensuring that they produce appropriate evidence to prove the ownership of the vehicle. Till proceedings under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act are completed in respect of the goods in question, the petitioners shall not alienate or part with possession of the vehicle.