IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 157 of 2008() ---------------------------------- TA.289/2005 of KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE ------------------------------------------------------------------- M/S. SHAH CASHEW COMPANY, PALLICKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHIHAN SHAH BY ADV. MR.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON MR.HARISANKAR V. MENON RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:- --------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.V.K.SHAMSUDEEN THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ S.T.Rev. NO: 157 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th March, 2009. JUDGMENT RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. Of the two questions raised in the revision filed by the assessee the first question pertains to disallowance of stock transfer of Rs.1,26,125/- to consignment agent for sale under consignment agency agreement. Admittedly petitioner has not produced F form or complied with Rule 5A of the CST (Kerala) Rules. Consequently we reject this contention raised by the petitioner. 2. Another issue pertains to disallowance of concessional rate at 4% on turnover of Rs.24,92,500/- which pertains to interstate sales not covered by C forms. Concession rate is claimed under notification 1731/1993 by which interstate sale is entitled to concessional rate. However, it is seen that concessional claimed is disallowed for the reason that there is no proof of interstate movement of goods from Kerala to outside State. In principle we find no ground to interfere with the orders of the lower authorities. However, counsel for the petitioner submitted that documents were intially seized by the CBI and thereafter returned. According to him S.T.Rev.NoL 157/2008 2 these documents are produced before the first appellate authority and though he verified the same; he did not grant exemption. Govt. Pleader contended that there is nothing on record to show that documents produced are sufficient to prove interstate movement. Goods transported through check post will be covered by transport documents with check post seals. Therefore, if petitioner produces either the transport copy of the delivery note or sale bill with check post seals showing movement of goods from this State to outside Kerala before the assessing officer, there will be a direction to the assessing officer to grant concessional rate on such quantity of cashew kernel covered by such documents. The petitioner is granted one month's time from receipt of copy of this judgment to produce documents failing which orders of the Tribunal will stand confirmed. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: