would further rely on Ext.P6 order which I have already adverted to, to contend that it would show that the proceedings alleged against Shri Kareem itself has ended in his favour. He would further contend that on a perusal of Section 49 of the KVAT Act, the respondents were duty bound to release the goods to the petitioner. Per contra, learned Government Pleader would contend that the petitioner was not entitled to the release of the goods. Learned Government Pleader relied on the language of Section 47(2) and pointed out that the language employed would show that it is only discretionary to give back the goods on furnishing of security. Shri V.P. Sukumar would submit that the mere fact that the goods are released to the petitioner would not stand in the way of the Department proceeding against Shri Kareem. He would also refer to the circumstances which are, of course, more elaborately considered in Ext.P5 order. In Ext.P5, the Officer has, inter alia, found that the 84 bags of dry pepper detained at 5/45 PM at the State border at 8 Acre near Cumbummettu belonged to Shri M.
