IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 ST.Rev..No. 232 of 2008() ------------------------- TA.120/2007 of S.T.A.T.ADDL.BENCH,ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE ---------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY JOINT COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY G.P. SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/ASSESSEE --------------------------------- W.ELECTRO CHEMICALS, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, EDAYAR. ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER FOR R1 SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2010, THE COURT ON 04/06/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... S.T.Rev. No.232 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 4th day of June, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified in granting concessional rate of tax on interstate sales not covered by C Form based on Notification SRO 1091/99 which applies to SSI units in respect of their products for local sales made within the State. Government Pleader has relied on Division Bench judgment of this court in P.S.SADASIVAN V. STATE OF KERALA (2008) 13 VST 481 whereunder this court has held that interstate sales not covered by C Forms attract normal rate of tax under the Schedule to the KGST Act, which in this case is 13.8%. Following the judgment abovereferred, we allow the revision filed by the State by reversing the order of the Tribunal and by restoring the assessment on the turnover not covered by C Forms for the entire year i.e. including the turnover for April and May 2002. 2. Even though we have allowed the revision case, we feel 2 respondent could be granted reduction in interest because amnesty benefit was available during the pendency of the revision case. If amnesty benefit is available as of now, it is for the respondent to claim the benefit. However, if no such benefit is available, interest on additional demand of tax will stand reduced to 50% provided the respondent remits the balance tax with 50% interest within three weeks from date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The respondent will produce copy of this judgment before the Assessing Officer for revision of assessment for raising the demand for payment as above or in accordance with any amnesty benefit available as of now, which respondent is free to claim. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms