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 THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 5 of 2009() ----------------------- TA.118/2007 of S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDL.BENCH,PALAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER/ASSESSEE/APELLANT --------------------------------------------------------- GEORGE PAUL MAMPILLY,M/S.TIMELY TRADERS, CHALAKUDY. BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.M.RAJ MOHAN SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM SRI.FRANKUR D.JAYAN SRI.SHANMUGHAM D. JAYAN RESPONDENT(S): REVENUE/ RESPONDENT ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P. SRI. TEKCHAND THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- S. T. Rev. No. 5 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. We have heard counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. On going through the Tribunal's order and after hearing parties, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal because Tribunal while remanding the case has given opportunity to the petitioner to produce proper documents for proving before the Intelligence Officer that there was no attempt of evasion of tax in respect of goods involved. A consignment of ice cream vending machine and Ice cream mix worth Rs. 7.8 lakhs was checked by the Intelligence squad of the sales tax department at Trichur on 19.8.2002. However, documents accompanying the goods were that of a Bangalore dealer dated 16.8.2002. The transport was one between the petitioner, the registered dealer at Chalakudy and a dealer at Guruvayur. Since petitioner was a registered dealer we see no reason why the petitioner transported goods 2 other than under cover of Delivery Notes issued to them by the sales tax department. Therefore there is irregularity on the part of the petitioner in allowing transport of goods under cover of documents issued by outside Kerala dealer. Petitioner has stated that petitioner is not a dealer in ice cream vending machine and the said machine was received only for demonstration purposes. Since petitioner's case is that machine was received for demonstration purposes and the same was returned to the dealer at Bangalore later, we see no reason why the petitioner could not produce checkpost sealed documents pertaining to return of goods. All what the Tribunal has done is to give an opportunity to the petitioner to produce valid documents before the Intelligence Officer. Therefore we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Sales Tax Revision is accordingly dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C.K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk 3