IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 21 of 2009 ------------------------ TA.154/2004 of S.T.A.T.ADDL.BENCH-II,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT: --------------------------- M/S RASNA ENTERPRISES LTD., MARKET ROAD, ALUVA,REPRESENTED BY THE SALES MANAGER, SHENOY JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.THANU PILLAI RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.MOHAMMED RAFFIQ THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/02/2009, ALONG WITH ST.Rev. No. 22 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S.T.Rev. Nos. 21 & 22 OF 2009 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 97 & 99 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Ramachandran Nair,J. The connected revisions are filed with a delay of 962 days. The explanation offered is the misplacing of orders by the authorised representative, which is not quite convincing. However, since the issue raised has to be decided, we allow the delay condonation petition and admit the revision petitions on condition that the petitioner shall remit Rs.5,000/- towards cost which will be paid to the Peoples Council for Social Justice. Petitioner has to produce DD in favour of Peoples Council for Social Justice before the Registrar within two weeks from receipt of this order. Registrar will receive and forward the same to the beneficiary without any delay. Compliance shall be reported by the Registrar to this Court. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader. Counsel for the petitioner has produced the judgment of the Supreme Court in the same matter in the assessee's case for earlier years, STRV : 21/2009 -:2:- reported in 2008 (16) VST 468 wherein the Supreme Court has remanded the case for consideration whether the item is food or vegetable product or non-alcoholic drink. We are told that the Tribunal has not considered the case after remand by the Supreme Court. It is seen that ST(Rev) No.438/06 also has been remanded by this Court to the Tribunal for fresh decision, based on the judgment of the Supreme Court. Therefore, following these judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court, we set aside the orders of Tribunal for these two years, i.e., 2000-01 and 2001-02 and remand the matter to the Tribunal for fresh decision along with batch cases. There will be a specific direction to the Tribunal to hear the parties and dispose of all the revisions within three months from receipt of this order. Government Pleader will also communicate the order to the Tribunal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (K. SURENDRA MOHAN) Judge. ttb STRV : 21/2009 -:3:- STRV : 21/2009 -:4:-