Transit detention on reasonable suspicion of tax evasion is valid even with a Form No.16 ownership certificate.

Goods in transit may be detained under the Kerala VAT regime where the checking officer has reason to suspect improper documents or attempted tax evasion. A Form No.16 certificate for transportation other than in pursuance of a sale does not prevent detention if suspicion arises. The detention power under Section 47(2) is distinct from the later penal process under Sections 47(5) and 47(6), which requires enquiry and a finding of actual attempted evasion before penalty can be imposed. On the facts stated, the detention notices were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether goods transported into the State on a certificate of ownership in Form No.16 by a non-registered dealer could be detained under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act on a reasonable suspicion of tax evasion and whether the detention notices were liable to be quashed.

Analysis: Section 46 requires the prescribed documents to accompany goods in transit, and Rule 58(18) contemplates a certificate of ownership in Form No.16 where transportation is otherwise than in pursuance of a sale. Section 47(2) empowers the checking officer to detain goods and insist on security when he has reason to suspect that the documents are not proper and genuine or that tax evasion is being attempted. That power is distinct from the later penal stage under Section 47(5) and Section 47(6), where an enquiry and a finding of attempted evasion are required before penalty can be imposed. The existence of a Form No.16 declaration for own use does not bar detention where suspicion of evasion arises, and the detention notices were not shown to suffer from lack of authority or legal infirmity.

Conclusion: The challenge to the detention notices failed, and the detention under Section 47(2) was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the Kerala Value Added Tax regime, detention of goods in transit may validly be ordered on a recorded reason to suspect tax evasion, and a finding of actual attempted evasion is not a precondition for invoking the detention power under Section 47(2).

---