Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to release of the excavator pending the Department's proposed revision against the appellate order.
Analysis: The excavator had been detained in proceedings under Section 47 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, and the Tribunal had set aside the penalty order. The petitioner sought release after obtaining the Tribunal order, while the Department stated that it intended to challenge that order in revision. The Court took note that the petitioner had already applied for release and that the Department could pursue the revisional remedy without unnecessary delay. A limited period was therefore granted to enable the Department to file revision and obtain appropriate interlocutory orders.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to release of the excavator if the Department failed to file revision and secure appropriate interim orders within 15 days.