Dismissed

State of Kerala v. Geonair Aircondition & Refrigeration Manufacturing (P) Ltd.

Kerala HC3 Jun 2016OT.Rev/59/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Malayalam High Court dismissed the Revenue's revision petition challenging the VAT Appellate Tribunal and first appellate authority orders that allowed deletion of an addition to turnover. The court found no perversity in the authorities accepting debit and credit notes as proof of sales price variation.

What did the court decide?

Order appealed from is dismissed; petition filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

State of Kerala Vs Geonair Aircondition… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2016/13TH JYAISHTA, 1938H

¶7

OT.Rev.No. 59 of 2016 ()

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN TAVAT 634/2011 of KERALA VAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM DATED 30-06-2015

¶9

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:

¶10

STATE OF KERALA

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY GOVT PLEADER SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:

¶14

GEONAIR AIRCONDITION & REFRIGERATION MANUFACTURING (P) LTD. KINFRA PARK, KAKKANADU, COCHIN-682030.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR R1 BY ADV. SMTG.MINI(1748) R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD R1 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB JOHN (TRIVANDRUM)

¶16

THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

APPENDIX IN OTRV.59/16

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶19

ANNEXURE A: A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 11.11.2010

¶20

ANNEXURE B: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.3.2011 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS).

¶21

ANNEXURE C: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) 634/11 DATED 30.09.2015.

¶22

ANNEXURE C(a): A TRUE COPY OF ANNEXURE C .

¶23

/TRUE COPY/

¶24

PS TO JUDGE

¶25

ANTONY DOMINIC & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ.

¶26

O.T.Rev.No.59 of 2016 ----------------------------------Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2016

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

Antony Dominic, J.

¶29

The Revenue has filed this revision challenging the order passed by the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal in TA (VAT).No.634/11.

¶30

2.Heard learned Government Pleader for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent assessee.

¶31

The assessee is engaged in the export and local sale of air-conditioners and refrigerators. The assessee filed its return for the assessment year 2008-09, declaring its turn over. On scrutiny of all the documents, it was found that the assessee had not proved the transactions relating to Rs.76,40,479/-. This led to initiation of proceedings under section 25 of the KVAT Act and Annexure A assessment order was passed, rejecting the contention of the assessee that the aforesaid amount represented the sales price variation of the goods. The first appellate authority allowed the appeal filed by the assessee

¶32

¶33

OTRV.59/16

¶34

and ordered deletion of the addition from the turn over estimated. This was on the basis that the assessee had produced copies of debit notes and corresponding credit notes in Form No.9 for his verification and on his satisfying that the amount in question represented sales price variation. The Revenue challenged the order before the Tribunal, which upheld the order of the first appellate authority. It is in this background, this revision is filed by the Revenue.

¶35

Reading of the orders passed by the first appellate authority and the Tribunal would show that both the authorities, on facts and on verification of the documents including the debit notes and credit notes, were satisfied that the amount in question represented sales price variation. We do not find any perversity in the view taken by the authorities, justifying interference.

¶36

Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.

¶37

Sd/ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge.

¶38

Sd/DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, Judge. kkb.

State of Kerala v. Geonair Aircondition & Refrigeration Manufacturing (P) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Geonair Aircondition & Refrigeration Manufacturing (P) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.v.Mohammed Hilal Vs Aziz

The Commissioner of Customs Vs M/S. Shivam International

Noufal Vs Commercial Taxes Officer

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut Vs Shri. Jafees Mohammed

State of Kerala Vs M/S. Peeyommae

Paul K.J Vs State of Kerala