IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
TRC No. 320 of 2000()
1. STATE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M/S.COUSINS MUNICIPAL SHOPPING COMPLEX
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SMT.S.K.DEVI
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :12/06/2007
O R D E R
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
----------------------------------------------------------
T.R.C. No.320 of 2000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 12th day of June, 2007
ORDER
H.L. DATTU, CJ.
The Revenue, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Sales
Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench II, Ernakulam in T.A.No.433 of
1999 for the assessment year 1995-96 dated 21.3.2000 is before us in this
revision petition filed under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act
read with Rule 41(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules.
2. The Revenue has raised the following question of law for our
consideration and decision. The question of law reads as under:
“Is not the Tribunal in error in construing the scope and
purport of section 5(1)(vi) of the KGST Act? Is there any
warrant under the said section to exclude the tax collection
at the earlier point in the matter of computation of taxable
turnover for exigibility to value added tax?”
3. The question of law raised in this revision petition is no more res
integra in view of the law declared by a Division Bench of this Court in the
case of State of Kerala v. The Chemmannur Distributors – [2003] 11
KTR 103. In the said decision the court has observed as under:
“The respondent had purchased goods from the
manufacturers who have collected sales tax at 12% on the
purchases made by the respondent. The respondent had
sold the goods and paid tax on the value addition at the
rate of 12% and remitted the same. While paying the tax
TRC 320/2000 2
the respondent has excluded the entire purchase price
including sales tax collected by the supplier and paid tax
only on the value addition, that is the margin received by
the respondent.
The Tribunal held that the exemption will include sale tax
paid at the purchase point. The decision of the Tribunal is
confirmed.”
4. In view of the law declared by this court, the question of law
raised for our consideration and decision by the Revenue requires to be
answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. Ordered
accordingly.
H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
mt/
TRC 320/2000 3
H.L. DATTU, C.J. &
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
T.R.C. NO.320 OF 2000
ORDER
12.6.2007