IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 243 of 2007() ------------------------------------ TA.2/2003 of SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL.BENCH, KOTTAYAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: --------------------------------------- THE KELTRON CONTROLS DIVISION, AROOR. BY DR.K.B.MUHAMED KUTTY, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV.MR.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/REVENUE: ---------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.VINOD CHANDRAN THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2009, ALONG WITH WTRV NO.246 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ S.T.REV. NOS: 243 & 246 OF 2007 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th February, 2009. JUDGMENT RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. Following the judgment of the Suprme Court in ONGEC's case a Division Bench of this Court in KSEB's case held that as far as possible dispute between government on one side and government companies on the other side should be settled by government. We do not think that the disputed tax is an exemption in this regard. In fact petitioner is an ailing company fully under the control of the Kerala Government. On the one hand it is seeking state assistance for survival and on the other hand it is challenging payment of sales tax which goes straight to the state. The issue raised in this case pertains to limitation of assessment which again is on account of the flow on the part of the government officers engaged in assessment. In the first place sales tax is a tax on commodity which is supposed to be collected and remitted along with monthly returns. Even if assessment gets time barred there is no provision to grant revision of collected tax because even when assessment is not tenable provision under the Act is to forfeit collected tax and S.T.Rev.Nos. 243 & 246/2007 2 grant revision to customers on their application. Therefore, we feel this is a policy decision which should be decided by the Government. In fact this Court in many cases directed the Chief Secretary to Government to constitute a committee consists of Secretaries of department which in this case is Secretary to Taxes and the Secretary to Industries and decide the matter. We therefore dispose of the S.T. Revision cases without considering the case on merits but directing the Chief Secretary to decide on the grievance of the petitioner within three months from making an application along with copy of the judgment. In fact in another case we directed Chief Secretary to issue instruction to all companies under the control of the Government. In fact in the Plantation Corporation case we have directed the government to impose restrictions on company's litigation against the state and among the public sector companies under the control of the government which should be followed in this case also. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj S.T.Rev.Nos. 243 & 246/2007 3 K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: