CST exemption on inter-State rubber sales had to be considered in light of subsequent notifications, rather than the original notification alone. The Court dismissed the State's revisions, confirmed the remand and directed the Assessing Officer to decide the dealer's claim with reference to the notifications.
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 S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 29 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 199/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686507
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; SREEJITH R.NAIR ;JOY P.J.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.30/2022, 31/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-2-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 30 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 219/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; SREEJITH R.NAIR; JOY P.J.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-3-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 31 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 218/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD., ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; SREEJITH R.NAIR; JOY P.J.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-4-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 32 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 221/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD. ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-5-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 33 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 220/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD, ANAKKAL PO, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; SREEJITH R.NAIR; JOY P.J.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-6-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 34 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 223/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; P.J.JOY
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-7-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 35 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 222/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P.O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-8-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 36 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 235/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-9-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 37 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 237/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE AND GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD. ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 38 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 240/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL PO, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; P.J.JOY
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 39 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 238/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX(LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD. ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 40 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 236/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686507
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD. ANAKKAL P O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; K.KRISHNA MEERA V.MENON; P.J.JOY
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 41 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 241/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD. ANAKKAL P.O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON K.KRISHNA; P.J.JOY
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 42 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 242/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P.O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 43 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 243/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL PO, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON; K.KRISHNA P.J.JOY; MEERA V.MENON
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
-16-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 20TH ASWINA, 1944
OT.REV NO. 44 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER TAVAT 239/2014 OF STAT ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOTTAYAM REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA; REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER V K SHAMSUDHEEN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.A JOSE, KOLLAMKULAM AGENCIES PVT LTD ANAKKAL P.O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686507
BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V.MENON; K.KRISHNA R.SREEJITH; JOY P.J.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2022, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.29/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
O R D E R
[OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022]
S.V. Bhatti, J.
Heard Mr V K Shamsudheen, learned Senior Government
Pleader, and Mr Harisankar V Menon, learned Advocate, for
parties.
221, 222, 223, 235, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242 & 243/2014 is the revision petitioners. K A Jose, Kottayam/dealer
is the respondent.
2.1 The Government in the purported exercise of powers
conferred by sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the CST Act 1956
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
issued the following notifications:
For clarity, the notifications are referred to as first, second, and third notifications, respectively. Through the first notification, the Government exempted the tax payable under sub-section (1) or (2) of Section 8 on the turnover of sale of natural rubber coming under Entry 134 of List A to the Third Schedule of the KVAT Act 2003 and tread rubber [HSN 4006.10.00] in the course of inter-State trade or commerce subject to the condition that the said products have suffered tax under the KVAT Act 2003. Through the second notification, the Government exempted payment of tax under sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the CST Act on the fulfilment of the requirements stated in sub-section (4)
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
of the said Act. In other words, the situation covered by the first notification is with reference to sub-sections (1) and (2), whereas the second notification restricted the exemption to the contingencies covered by sub-section (1) of Section 8. The third notification introduced an amendment providing for optional payment of tax under the CST Act.
2.3 Now, let us revert to the circumstances in the revisions on hand. We take note of the circumstances referred by the Tribunal in the common order under revision, viz . that the dealer is engaged in the business of creamed latex and rubber. The dealer was making local purchases of rubber, both from registered and unregistered dealers. The dealer was selling the rubber inter-State and intra-State. Insofar as the inter-State sale is concerned, the first notification granted exemption from payment of CST. The Assessing Officer in the
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
order made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act denied the exemption claimed under the first notification. The dealer appealed before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), and, for our purpose, it would be sufficient to note that the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), by referring to the second notification, remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority for disposal afresh. The State filed appeals before the Tribunal by contending that the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) fell in error by calling upon the Assessing Officer to take note of the second notification noted above.
2.4 The Tribunal, after considering the sequence of granting exemptions and withdrawing the exemption granted, held that the remand by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) is tenable. As part of its consideration, the Tribunal observed that the dealer has the choice to opt for the exemption or pay the
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
tax otherwise payable in this behalf. Hence, the revisions at the instance of the State.
case on hand, is gaining a double advantage and when the order dated 24.03.2010 was made by the Assessing Officer the first notification alone was in operation. The second notification does not show that the first notification is superseded by the second notification. Giving choice to the dealer is illegal and the order dated 24.03.2010 is correct.
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
Government, the Government, in its wisdom, has limited the operation to sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the CST Act. Therefore, for all purposes, an issue arising under the first notification shall be considered, and the dispute decided by giving due effect to the exemption limited by the second notification. The third notification, wherein a proviso was incorporated. i.e., giving the option to the dealer. This has to be examined in deciding the dispute; the remand is justified from any point of view. He prays for dismissing the revisions.
5.1 The first illegality pointed out is that the order of the Assessing Officer must be considered and decided by referring to contemporaneous expressions used in the first notification. In other words, the notification has to be literally applied, and
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
orders, as are deemed fit, passed by the Assessing Officer. We
are afraid the said argument is untenable because the Government, for jurisdictional issues, rectified the mistake that
has crept in the first notification. With the issuance of the second notification, for all purposes, the requirement of subsection (2) etc, shall not be construed as still in force. The argument of the Government, if accepted, the State’s jurisdiction to grant exemption to Sub-section (2) is also accepted. The effect of the second notification is considered by a learned Single Judge in Hi-Tek Traders v. Commercial Tax Officer1 , and we are in respectful agreement with the conclusion of the learned Single Judge in Hi-Tek Traders case. On the choice available to the dealer, we notice that though the issuance of the first notification was not pointed out before the Tribunal,
1 (2020) 74 GSTR 486 (Ker)
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
the Tribunal, upon consideration of the statutory scheme, held that the dealer has a choice. In our considered view, from the above discussion, no infirmity is made out within the scope of Section 63 of the KVAT Act. The order of remand by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the order of the Tribunal are confirmed. The Assessing Officer considers and decides the relief prayed for by the dealer, by keeping in perspective the notifications referred to above. Revisions fail. Dismissed. No order as to Costs.
Sd/S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/BASANT BALAJI JUDGE
jjj
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 30/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN KVAT NO.2504/2011 & CONNECTED CASES DATED 17.05.2013 Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSD BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NO199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 31/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 14.01.2009
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 32/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 14.01.2009
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 33/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 14.01.2009
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 34/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 16.04.2012
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NO.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 35/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 16.04.2012
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NO.222/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 36/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 37/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER PONKUNNAM DATED 07.04.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF MAY, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NO.S 199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 38/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 07.04.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 39/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 07-04-2012 FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NO.S.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 40/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 03.04.2012 FOR THE YEAR 2010-11
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NOS. 199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 41/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 07.04.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 42/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 07.04.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT)NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 43/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 07.04.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 44/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 07.04.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 2011
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NOS.199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
OT.Rev Nos.29/2022, 30/2022, 31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022, 35/2022, 36/2022, 37/2022, 38/2022, 39/2022, 40/2022, 41/2022, 42/2022, 43/2022, 44/2022
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 29/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PONKUNNAM DATED 24.03.2010
Annexure 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN KVAT NO.2563/2011 DATED 19.12.2021
Annexure 3 ORIGINAL COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NO. 199/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 18.03.2021
2 issues framed by the court
Could the original CST exemption notification govern the assessment without giving effect to the subsequent notification restricting exemption to Section 8(1)?
Did the remand recognising the dealer's choice to claim exemption or pay tax warrant interference under Section 63 of the KVAT Act?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hi-Tek Traders v. Commercial Tax OfficerFollowed¶285
(2020) 74 GSTR 486 (Ker)
6 provisions across 5 enactments
STATE OF KERALA
K A JOSE
S.V.BHATTI
BASANT BALAJI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
