IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 RP.No. 1003 of 2008(J) ---------------------- REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SWASTHIK ENTERPRISES, K.K.ROAD, KOZHIKODE REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P.K.HASHIR AHAMED. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ADITIONAL BENCH, KOZHIKODE. 2. ASST.COMMISSIONER, (ASSMT), SPECIAL CIRCLE-11, KOZHIKODE. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. G.P. SRI.TEKCHAND THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... R.P. No.1003 of 2008 in O.P. No.32431 of 2000 .................................................................... Dated this the 26th day of September, 2008. ORDER Review Petition is filed on the ground that one of the grounds raised in the O.P. challenging the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was not considered by this court. It is seen from the judgment that issue raised was decided on merit in favour of the petitioner cancelling the adverse order passed by the Tribunal in rectification proceedings under Section 43 of the KGST Act. Therefore, the court did not consider the legality of the rectification order passed by the Tribunal under Section 43 of the KGST Act. Counsel submitted that against the judgment in the O.P., Writ Appeal filed by the State is pending and on merits if Writ Appeal is allowed, petitioner's challenge against Section 43 order will not get decided. I find force in this contention because the impugned order of the Tribunal was issued under Section 43 of the Act which was challenged also on the ground that proceedings under Section 43 was not maintainable. Counsel has relied on judgment of this court in R.K.LATEX PVT. LTD. V. STATE OF KERALA (2007(4) ILR (KER.) 365) wherein this court has held that a wrong order of the Tribunal cannot be corrected in rectification proceedings 2 under Section 43 of the KGST Act. Following this judgment, R.P. is allowed holding that proceedings completed by the Tribunal under Section 43 is without jurisdiction in as much as change of view of the Tribunal is not a ground to rectify appellate order. Consequently O.P. will stand allowed on this ground also. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms