IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 9 of 2009() ----------------------- TA.414/2006 of S.T.A.T.ADDL.BENCH-II,ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/APPELLANT: ----------------------------------------------------- B.GEORGE ABORA, PROPRIETOR, VICTORY RUBBER TRADERS, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.O. THOMAS SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE ------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA. BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER(TAXES), SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- S.T.Rev. No. 9 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel for the revision petitioner. Petitioner, a dealer in rubber, filed returns disclosing turnover which was initially accepted by the Department. However, later it was noticed that petitioner was engaged in shipment of rubber from Kerala to parties in Gujarat. Since petitioner has suppressed transactions of purchase and sale of rubber to the Rubber Board with whose licence petitioner was carrying on business, petitioner's licence was cancelled by the Rubber Board. Based on information received from the Rubber Board which in turn got information through their marketing intelligence agency, the assessing officer made revised assessment for bringing to tax the escaped turnover. It is seen that in first appeal, the appellate authority granted substantial relief by limiting the assessment only on the suppressed turnover. In further appeal, the Tribunal only confirmed STRV : 9/09 2 assessment of actual suppression noticed. Even though counsel for the petitioner submitted that evidence from Rubber Board is not tenable, we are unable to accept the same because Rubber Board is a statutory authority under the control of the Government which has detailed network to find out production and sale of rubber through their market intelligence department. Petitioner has no case that proceedings initiated by the Rubber Board against him ended up in orders favourable to him. Therefore there is nothing wrong in sales tax department relying on the intelligence information collected by the Rubber Board based on which revised assessment is made. Tax Revision Petition is consequently dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C.K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk STRV : 9/09 3