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 WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2008 / 4TH ASHADHA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 434 of 2006 ------------------------------------ (ORDER DATED 29/11/2005 IN TA.No. 426/2004 OF SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD). .................... PETITIONER:APPELLANT: ------------------------------------ M/S.CHEERANS STRUCTURALS, CHALLISSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY FINANCE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2008, ALONG WITH STRV NO. 236 OF 2007, STRV NO. 231 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ----------------------------------------------------- S.T.Rev.No.434 of 2006 , S.T.Rev.No.231 of 2007 & S.T.Rev.No.236 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of June, 2008 O R D E R H.L.Dattu, C.J. In these revision petitions, the petitioners call in question the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A.Nos.426 of 2004, 427 of 2004 and 428 of 2004. 2. The authorities under the Act have levied tax on the assessee only because the assessee did not produce Form 21C certificate issued by the awarder of the contract. If the assessee had produced that certificate, its liability to pay tax would have been just 2% on the sales turnover and not 6%. 3. In these revision petitions, it is stated that, though sufficient efforts were made by the petitioner, it could not obtain Form 21C certificate from the awarder of the contract and therefore it could not produce the same before the assessing authority, the first appellate authority or before the Tribunal. 4. Sri.A.Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the assessees/petitioners would submit that, now he has secured all the S.T.Rev.Nos.434/06, 231/07 & 236/07 -2- certificates from the awarders of contract and he may be permitted to produce the same before the assessing authority. 5. In the normal course we would not have entertained this request of the learned counsel Sri.A.Kumar. We are entertaining the request of the learned counsel only for the reason that there should not be double payment of tax on the very same transaction. 6. In that view of the matter, we dispose of these revision petitions and set aside the orders passed by the assessing authority for the assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95 and the orders passed by the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. We remand the matter to the assessing authority to re-do the matter, in accordance with law. We make it clear that the assesseess shall produce Form 21C certificate before the assessing authority within one month's time after service of notice by the assessing authority. If for any reason the assesses fail to produce Form 21C certificate, the assessing authority is at liberty to proceed to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. The orders passed by us shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case. 7. Consequently, I.A.No.3553 of 2006 in S.T.Rev.No.434 of 2006, I.A.No.1660 of 2007, I.A.No.1661 of 2007 in S.T.Rev.No.231 S.T.Rev.Nos.434/06, 231/07 & 236/07 -3- of 2007, I.A.No.1748 of 2007, I.A.No.1749 of 2007 in S.T.Rev.No.236 of 2007 are closed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS