IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 S.T.Rev.No.415 of 2006 ----------------------------------------- T.A.NO.314/2005 OF THE KERALA SALES-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD (ORDER DATED 21-03-2006) [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02] .................... REVISION PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- P.L.TONY, PANTHALOOKKARAN JEWELLERY, KODAKARA. BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.M.RAJ MOHAN SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM SRI.FRANKUR D.JAYAN SRI.K.P.PRADEEP (PAYYANNUR) SRI.SHANMUGHAM D. JAYAN SMT.P.K.MAYA DEVI RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT/REVENUE:- --------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:- H.L.Dattu,C.J. & A.K.Basheer,J. -------------------------------------------- S.T.Rev.No.415 of 2006 ------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 30th day of June, 2008 ORDER H.L.Dattu,C.J. This revision petition is directed against the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Palakkad in T.A.No.314 of 2005 dated 21.03.2006. 2. The assessment year in question is 2001-02. The assessee had opted to pay tax at the compounded rate under Section 7 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (“K.G.S.T. Act” for short) in lieu of Section 5 of the Act. The authorities under the Act and the Tribunal, rightly understanding the purport of Section 7(1)(a) of the Act, have negatived the plea of the petitioner. 3. We have carefully perused the orders passed by the Tribunal. In our considered opinion, the Tribunal has not committed any error whatsoever. 4. The parameters of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court is very much limited. This can be only on two circumstances - firstly, if the Tribunal has decided erroneously, and, secondly, has failed to decide any question of law. S.T.Rev.415/2006 - 2 - 5. In view of the above, the revision petition requires to be rejected and it is rejected and the questions of law framed by the assessee are answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. 6. I.A.No.3313 of 2006 is dismissed. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice A.K.Basheer Judge vku/-