Petitioner, a government contractor, challenged deductions from his bill by the Kerala Water Authority. The Authority claimed exemption based on a government notification despite the manufacturer granting only partial exemption. The court found no illegality and dismissed the writ petition.
None. The writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2011 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1933
WP(C).No. 29356 of 2011(T)
----------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------------
T.I.RAJU, S/O. LATE T.E.ITHAPIRI, AGED 63 YEARS, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, THURUTHUMMEL HOUSE, KUSUMAGIRI P.O., KOCHI-30.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.JOSE SMT.TESSY JOSE
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------
1. KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 001.
2. M/S. ELECTRO STEEL CASTING LTD., 148/150, (OLD NO.98/99), LUZ CHURCH ROAD, CHENNAI-600 101.
3. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DIVISION 5, 692, MHU COMPLEX, NANDANAM, CHENNAI-600 035.
R1 BY ADV. SRI. N. DINESH, SC., K.W.A. R3 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC,CB EX
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
svs
W.P.(C). NO. 29356/2011
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE.
svs
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
W.P.(C) No. 29356 of 2011 T
Dated this the 21st day of November, 2011
J U D G M E N T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Petitioner was a contractor of the Water
Authority. In this writ petition what is complained of is that the Water Authority has made unauthorised deductions from the petitioner's bill. According to the petitioner, in terms of the notification issued by the Government of India, based on a certificate issued by the District Collector, they claimed exemption from central excise duty, when they purchased pipes from the second respondent. It is submitted that,
when the final bills were settled by the Water Authority, they made deductions from their bill more than in excess of what was allowed by the manufacturer towards duty exemption. It is this deduction which is complained of in this writ petition.
learned counsel for the Water Authority, what is seen is that the exemption from duty is a benefit which is available to the
W.P.(C) No.29356/2011
: 2 :
Water Authority and that under the notification issued by the Government of India, the Water Authority is eligible for exemption of 16.32% of the price. It is stated that, a certificate was obtained by the petitioner from the District Collector at the request of the Water Authority and on its production before the manufacturer, as against 16.32% exemption, the manufacturer allowed exemption of only 6.32%. It is stated that this was an arrangement between the petitioner and the manufacturer and that when the final bills of the petitioner were settled, the Water Authority claimed exemption of 16.32% itself. According to the Water Authority, the deduction they made is fully in compliance with the notification issued by the Government of India.
W.P.(C) No.29356/2011
: 3 :
However, the Water Authority made full deduction of 16.32% from the final bill of the petitioner which cannot be said to be
illegal. I see no reason to interfere with the matter.
Writ petition fails and accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks/21/11
// True Copy //
P.A. To Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Water Authority's deduction of 16.32% excise duty from the petitioner's bill when the manufacturer had only allowed 6.32% exemption.
T.I.RAJU
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
M/S. ELECTRO STEEL CASTING LTD.
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
