IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2010 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 920 of 2007(H) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- SRI.V.N.PAVITHRAN, PROPRIETOR, MEGHA GRANITES, CHEENIKUZHY, NORTH MAZHUVANNOOR, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, SECOND CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC.920/07 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DT.4.12.2006. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THEPURCHASE BILL DTD.6.1.2006 ISSUED BY THE SELLER M/S.VOLVO INDIA (P) LTD., BANGALORE. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT CERTIFICATE DTD.13.1.2006 ISSUED BY THE SALES TAX INSPECTOR, SALES TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD 30.1.2006 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 13.2.2006 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION SRO.324/05 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.920 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT By Ext.P2, the petitioner purchased a hydraulic excavator from Bangalore and brought it to Kerala. That machinery was employed and put to use in the course of the activity of the petitioner in his metal crushing and granite unit. To this extent, there is no contraversion for the department. The entire products generated by the petitioner, including by the application of the equipment in question, are taxable at the hands of the petitioner. With these two situations being conjunctively available, the petitioner was entitled to rebate in terms of Section 12 of the KVAT Act. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed directing that the finding in Ext.P1, contrary to what is stated above, will stand quashed and the petitioner shall be granted special rebate as provided under Section 12 of the KVAT Act for the entry tax paid by him in WPC.920/07. 2 accordance with Ext.P3 payment certificate. The excess amount collected from the petitioner i.e., Rs.6,13,875/- will be given due credit against future payments. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.16/04.