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 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 ST.Rev..No. 188 of 2009() ------------------------- TA.321/2008 of S.T.A.T.ADDL.BENCH,ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER: -------------------------- M/S.ATHANI TOURIST HOME, ATHANI, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER K.RAMAKRISHNAN. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2009, ALONG WITH STRV.192 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ---------------------------------- S.T.Revision Nos.188 and 192 of 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 O R D E R ----------------- Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader for the respondent. Question raised pertains to enhancement of gross profit sustained by the first appellate authority and confirmed by the Tribunal. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner returned gross profit of 33.70% for one year and for the other years 37.75% which according to him is reasonable and realistic and there was no justification for the officer to reject the same. However, Government Pleader contended that the details of sale of each product sold by the petitioner was taken by the officer and he noticed abnormal reduction in gross profit from previous years without any justification. The petitioner's explanation for reduction in gross profit is that Beverages Corporation started retail sale of liquor very close to the bar hotel and of course, if a realistic approach is made certainly opening of a retail outlet by the wholesaler will go to reduce the turnover of the nearby bar hotel. However, we do not think gross profit fixed at 45% in any STRV.188 & 192 /09 2 case is very high because without a high level of gross profit we do not think a bar hotel can be run viably because turnover disclosed is below 2 crores and the bar licence fee payable each year is around 20 lakhs. Since questions raised are only on pure estimation of gross profits we do not find any question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal. We therefore dismiss these STRV cases filed by the petitioner. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb