IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ST Rev No. 366 of 2005()
1. TRAVANCORE RUBBERS LIMITED,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.JOHN RAMESH K.I.JOHN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :14/12/2007
O R D E R
H.L.Dattu,C.J. & P.N.Ravindran,J.
-----------------------------------------------
S.T.Rev.No.366 of 2005
-----------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 14th day of December, 2007
ORDER
H.L.Dattu,C.J.
The petitioner is a Company, registered under the provisions of
the Companies Act. It is engaged in the business of plantation. It is also
registered under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963
(“KGST Act” for short) and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (“CST Act” for short).
(2) In this Sales Tax Revision, we are concerned with the
assessment year 1991-92.
(3) The assessee is having Rubber Estate at Erumeli. The
assessing authority while completing the assessment for the assessment year
1991-92, had levied sales tax on the sales of standing rubber trees effected by
the assessee. Aggrieved by the said order of the assessing authority, the
assessee had carried the matter before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner,
Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax, Kottayam. The said authority had
rejected the appeal. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee was before the
Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A.No.237 of
1994. The Tribunal, relying upon the observations made by a Division Bench of
this Court in the case of Tropical Plantations Limited v. State of Kerala [(2001)
9 KTR 68], had rejected the assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved by the said order
passed by the Tribunal, the assessee is before us in this Sales Tax Revision.
(4) The assessee has framed the following questions of law for
our consideration and decision. They are as under:
(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the
Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the authorities
S.T.Rev.No.366 of 2005 – 2 –
below levying tax on the sales turnover of standing rubber trees
which were sold pursuant to agreement dated 27.3.91 and 17.4.91
relying on the judgment in 9 KTR 68 (Ker) which judgment is in
jeopardy.
(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the
Tribunal was justified in holding that standing rubber trees are
timber coming within Explanation I to Section 2(xxvii) of the KGST
Act and hence exigible to tax while the 1st Appellate Authority
found that it is used for furniture only after chemical treatment and
this Honourable Court held in 12 KTR 201 that Rubber Wood is
only used as fire wood and it becomes timber only after chemical
treatment.
(iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the
Tribunal was justified as not considering the additional ground
raised before it regarding the very assessability of the sales
turnover of Rs.6,59,500/- for the year 1991-92, when the two
agreements dated 27.3.1991 decisively point out to the conclusion
that it is a sale deed showing that the sale has taken place on
27.3.1991 which relates to the assessment year 1990-91.
(iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in
the light of the decisions of this Honourable Court reported in 187
ITR 112, the sale of rubber trees for Rs.6,59,500/- based on
agreements dated 27.3.1991 can be taken as pertaining to and
relevant for the assessment year 1991-92″.
(5) Sri.John Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the
assessee would submit that the apex Court in the Special Leave Petitions filed
by Tropical Plantations Ltd., in Civil Appeal Nos.396-410 of 2002, has set
aside the orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court and, further, has
remanded the matter to the Tribunal for re-consideration.
S.T.Rev.No.366 of 2005 – 3 –
(6) In the instant case, the Tribunal, while rejecting the
assessee’s appeal, had primarily relied upon the dicta laid down by this Court
in the case of Tropical Plantations Ltd. and that decision is not approved by the
apex Court. In fact, the apex Court has remanded the matter to the Tribunal for
re-consideration of the whole issue.
(7) In view of the decision of the apex Court, in our opinion, the
orders passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained by us.
(8) Accordingly, we make the following:
Order
(i) The orders passed by the Tribunal in T.A.No.237 of 1994 dated 12th
February, 2004 for the assessment year 1991-92 is set aside.
(ii) The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration
in accordance with law as directed by the apex Court in the case of Tropical
Plantations Ltd. v. State of Kerala [Civil Appeal Nos.396-410 of 2002 dated 25th
July, 2007].
Ordered accordingly.
H.L.Dattu
Chief Justice
P.N.Ravindran
Judge
vku/-