IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19329 of 2004(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. PYARELAL COIR PRODUCTS, NIDA KOZAMMARAKKAD, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD- 678 621 REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR SALE TAX EXEMPTION, TRIVANDRUM, REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY. 2. THE ADDL. SALES OFFICER-III, 2ND CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. G.P. SHRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON 03/02/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 19329/04. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION. P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.3.1.03 BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DIST. INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PALAKKAD. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.28.4.02 BY THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, PALAKKAD. P4. COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.5.9.03 BY R2. P5. COPY OF THE -D0- DTD.5.9.03 BY R2. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.19329 of 2004 ================== Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. According to the petitioner, as a new industrial unit, the petitioner is entitled for sales tax exemption under SRO No.1729 of 2003 as amended by SRO Nos.1090 of 1999 and 295 of 2000. The claim of the petitioner was rejected by the appropriate authority on the ground that the petitioner has not satisfied one of the conditions for eligibility for exemption. However, now both sides agree that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2922/2007 and the decision in State of Kerala v. Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. [2004 (3) KLT 85], the matter should be remanded to the 1st respondent for reconsideration in accordance with those decisions. In the above circumstances the impugned orders are quashed and the matter is remanded to the 1st respondent with a direction to reconsider the claim for exemption of the petitioner in accordance with the decisions in W.A.2922/2007 and Pepsico's case (supra). Needless to say, until the matter is reconsidered and orders passed, no coercive proceedings shall be taken against the petitioner to the extent of claim made for exemption. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2