Disposed

M/S.Royal Enfield v. the Intelligence Inspector

Kerala HC28 Oct 2016WP(C)/34644/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged seizure of motorcycles and demand for duty. Court granted relief to release goods if petitioner furnishes a simple bond without sureties within two months and the respondent completes adjudication within two months.

What did the court decide?

Release of seized motorcycles on furnishing a simple bond without sureties; adjudication proceedings to be completed within two months.

M/S.Royal Enfield Vs the Intelligence Inspector — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/6TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 34644 of 2016 (E)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M/S. ROYAL ENFIELD,

¶8

(A UNIT OF EICHER MOTORS LTD), DOOR NO.25/85 A,B,C & D, OPP. TO INDIAN OIL PETROL PUMP, KOONAMTHAI, EDAPPALLY-682 024, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR.BENNYMON V.K.

¶9

BY ADVS.SMT.S.K.DEVI, SMT.P.K.MAYA DEVI.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA, CAMP AT PUNNAPRA -688 001.

¶12

2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (ASSMT), DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPL. CIRCLE III, ERNAKULAM-682 015.

¶13

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.K. SHAMSUDHEEN.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

rs.

¶16

WP(C).No. 34644 of 2016 (E)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶19

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OR NO.290/16-17 DATED 26.10.2016. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LORRY RECEIPT DATED 26.10.2016.

¶20

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

**A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * *** W.P.C.No.34644 of 2016

¶25

Dated this the 28^th day of October 2016

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

Petitioner challenges Ext.P1 by which 24 motor cycles have been detained and the petitioner is called upon to remit an amount of Rs.10,33,850/-. In Ext.P1, it is stated that though there are 24 invoices, only 23 motor cycles were found and therefore suspecting the veracity of the document, demand had been made.

¶28

Petitioner, apparently, is a registered dealer and therefore it is open for the officer concerned to proceed with adjudication. However, there is no reason to call upon the petitioner to remit the aforesaid amount.

¶29

Taking into consideration the overall factual aspects involved in the case and the fact that the petitioner is a registered dealer, I am of the view that the goods can be released to the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶30

(i) The goods mentioned in Ext.P1 shall be released to the petitioner on the petitioner furnishing a simple bond without sureties before the 1^st respondent.

¶31

W.P.C.No.34644/2016

¶32

¶33

(ii) The 1^st respondent shall complete the adjudication proceedings within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶34

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶35

(sd/-)

¶36

(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

¶37

jsr

M/S.Royal Enfield v. the Intelligence Inspector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Royal Enfield v. the Intelligence Inspector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anusha M.K. Vs University of Calicut

Kamalamma Vs the District Collector

Shine Ceramics Vs State of Kerala

Smt. Laila Mathew Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S.Modern Electricals Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Assmt)

M/S.Modern Sanitary Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Assmt.) - 11