IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 ST.Rev..No. 262 of 2009() ------------------------- TA.77/2009 of S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDL.BENCH,KZD. .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT: -------------------- ALLIED RESINS & CHEMICALS LTD., AZHIKODE, KANNUR(DEFUNCT) HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT 13 CAMAC STREET, KOLKATTA. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... S.T. Rev. No.262 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Revision is filed against order of the Tribunal sustaining the sales tax assessment made on the petitioner for 2001-2002. The appellant's case is that appellant had not carried on any business and so much so, they have not filed any return disclosing turnover. However, the Assessing Officer found that during the previous year petitioner had a turnover of Rs.42,63,246/- and even during 2001-2002, petitioner renewed the registration under the K.G.S.T and C.S.T. Acts. Since registration was renewed which was for the purpose of carrying on business, the Assessing Officer estimated turnover based on previous year's assessment and 10% was added to it towards alleged omissions. Counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner had in fact stopped the business on 31.3.2001. However, it is seen from the orders of the Tribunal that petitioner was in receipt of consignments even on 30.3.2001 and petitioner has no explanation when the said consignment 2 was disposed of. Further, renewal of registration entitles department to assume that business is continuing because if the dealer does not want to continue business, Rule 51 provides for intimation of stoppage of business and petitioner should have applied for cancellation of registration retained by them. In fact, goods are allowed to be brought from outside State with documents containing sales tax registration numbers allotted to dealers. Therefore, a dealer who has discontinued business has no justification for retaining the registration because his registration numbers would be misused by other dealers for bringing goods to the State. We do not find anything wrong in the department assuming that as long as petitioner retains registration, petitioner could have done business using the registration numbers. So far as turnover assessed is concerned, we do not think there is any scope for this court interfering with turnover fixed. However, since counsel submitted that previous year's assessment is remanded for refixing turnover, there will be direction to the Assessing Officer to adopt the revised turnover, if any, fixed for the previous year. We also do not find any justification to make any addition to the previous year's turnover because if business 3 was progressing, then the petitioner would not be closing business, which they have later done. Revision is disposed of with the above directions. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge V.K.MOHANAN Judge pms