IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 S.T.Rev.No.27 of 2007 ------------------------------------------ T.A.NO.72/1998 OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM - ORDER DATED 16.08.2005. (ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-93) .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:- --------------------------------------------------------- SEASON RUBBERS (P) LTD., KOOVAPPALLY, KANJIRAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:- ------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (TAXES) SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:- H.L.Dattu,C.J. & A.K.Basheer,J. ---------------------------------------------- S.T. Rev.No.27 of 2007 ----------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th November, 2008 ORDER H.L.Dattu, C.J. The assessee is a dealer, registered under the the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (“Act” for short). He is a dealer in latex, having his place of business at Koovappally in Kanjirappally. (2) This revision petition is filed by the assessee, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kottayam in T.A.No.72 of 1998 dated 16th August, 2005. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has confirmed the orders passed by the assessing authority for the assessment year 1992-93 dated 30.12.1996. (3) Before the Tribunal, the assessee has pressed into service the notification issued by the State Government, in exercise of their power under Section 10 of the Act, in number S.R.O.695/2003. The assessee has also requested the Tribunal to grant the relief in view of the notification so issued by the State Government. The request of the assessee is rejected by the Tribunal on two counts - firstly, that the assessee had not taken up that contention before the assessing authority and also that he had not taken up the said ground in the memorandum of appeal filed before the Tribunal. Therefore, the Tribunal has not accepted the contention of the assessee's representative. S.T.Rev.27 of 2007. - 2 - (4) Admittedly, S.R.O.695/2003 is issued by the State Government in exercise of its powers under Section 10 of the Act on 25.07.2003. The notification is given retrospective effect from 1.4.1988 to 9.10.2001. In the notification, it is also stated, that, tax, if any, paid shall not be refunded. (5) In our opinion, the Tribunal, keeping in view the date on which the notification came into existence and the date on which the second appeal was filed by the assessee before the Tribunal, ought to have entertained claim of the petitioner and should have answered the claim one way or the other. That has not been done by the Tribunal. (6) In the notification that is issued by the State Government, certain exemptions are granted on the purchase turnover of the rubber. The assessing authority has levied tax on the purchase turnover of rubber under Section 5A of the Act. Whether, by virtue of this notification, the assessee is entitled for exemption from payment of purchase tax, is a matter which requires to be looked into by the assessing authority. (7) In the above view of the matter, we pass the following: Order (i) The revision petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order passed by the Tribunal in T.A.No.72 of 1998 dated 16.8.2005 and the orders passed by the assessing authority for the assessment year 1992-93 dated 30.12.1996 are set aside. S.T.Rev.27 of 2007. - 3 - (iii) The matter is remanded back to the assessing authority to redo the matter in accordance with law, keeping in view the notification issued by the State Government, in number S.R.O.695/2003 dated 25.7.2003. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice A.K.Basheer Judge vku/-