IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 ST.Rev..No. 164 of 2008() ------------------------- TA.119/2007 of S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDL.BENCH,KZD. .................... REVISION PEITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE ------------------------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REP.BY JOINT COMMISSIONER (LAW) IN-CHARGE COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI MOHAMMED RAFFIQ RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/ ASSESSEE ---------------------------------- M/S.RADHESYAM KHANDENWALL, PWD CONTRACOTOR, KANNUR. ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN FOR R1 THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------- STRV. No.164 of 2008 & C.M.Appln.No.405 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated, the 25th day of September, 2009 ORDER Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised in the S.T.Revision case, filed with delay, is whether the boat jetty is a civil construction work entitling the respondent to claim tax at compound rate of 2 percent under section 7(7) of the KGST Act. This issue stands decided in favour of the respondent by various decisions of the Division Bench. In fact, construction of Boat Jetty includes construction of bridge projecting into water. It is nothing but a civil work and in fact, subsequently, amendment was made enlarging the scope of civil construction work referred to in the Section. In the circumstances, we find no merit in the revision STR164/08 & CMA 405/08 -:2:- filed by the State. Consequently, the delay petition as well as the S.T. Revision are dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- STR164/08 & CMA 405/08 -:3:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT Dated:..