State Of Kerala vs Wynad Resins on 12 October, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

ST.Rev..No. 96 of 2009()


1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY JOINT
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. WYNAD RESINS, PUNNAPALA.P.O,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.RAMADAS

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN

 Dated :12/10/2009

 O R D E R
                     C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                                V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.
                ....................................................................
                       S.T.Rev. Nos.96 & 138 of 2009
                ....................................................................
                Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009.

                                           ORDER

Ramachandran Nair, J.

Heard the Government Pleader. The question raised is whether

the Tribunal was justified in directing adjustment of sales tax paid by

the respondent-assessee under the KGST Act against tax liability

determined under the Central Sales Tax Act. The assessments relate to

the years 1999-2000 and 2001-2002. In the course of assessment, the

Assessing Officer found that the assessee is not liable to pay tax under

the KGST Act by virtue of exemption available under Notification

issued by the Government. However, he forfeited the sales tax and

surcharge paid by the assessee for these two years. On appeal, the

Tribunal clearly found that the forfeited tax is not collected tax and it

is tax payable on rubber latex at the point of last purchase in the State.

In the first place, Section 46A(1) provides for forfeiture of tax only in

respect of collected tax. In this case assessee paid the tax under the

local Act by mistake and the said tax being tax payable at the purchase

2

point of the raw material purchased, is not collected tax. There is

nothing wrong in the Tribunal directing adjustment of remitted tax

towards CST found due from the respondent-assessee. The Tribunal,

therefore, rightly vacated the order forfeiting the tax paid by the

assessee and directed adjustment of the same towards CST dues. We

find no merit in the revisions filed by the department and therefore,

both the revision cases are dismissed.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge

V.K.MOHANAN
Judge
pms