M/S Alakode Rubber And Agricultural Marketing Co-Operative Society vs. The State Of Kerala
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Alakode Rubber & Agricultural Marketing Co-operative Society, is a dealer registered under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, engaged in the business of rubber. The revisions pertain to assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The Assessing Officer made a best judgment assessment, adding to the dealer's turnover. The dealer successfully challenged this before the Assistant Commissioner and the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal. The State's revisions were dismissed and remanded by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal. The current revisions are directed against a common order of the Tribunal dated January 6, 2020, in TA (VAT) No. 319 and 320 of 2017.
Held
The Court held that the entitlement or eligibility for the subject matter of the dispute centers around the three exemption notifications issued by the Government. Taking note of the second and third notifications and the view taken by this Court in the Hi-Teck Traders case, the Court found it appropriate to reconsider the issues. The endeavor of the petitioner is for remand and reconsideration of issues in the right perspective. The Court was of the view that the Assessing Officer should take note of the position in law as it stands today and give effect as contemplated by the second and third notifications. Consequently, the orders of the Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), and the Tribunal in both cases were set aside, and the matters were remitted to the Assessing Officer for disposal afresh. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is eligible for the exemptions provided under G.O.(P) No.159/2008/TD dated 31.07.2008, G.O.(P) No.181/2011/TD dated 30.11.2011, and G.O. (P) No.124/2019/Taxes dated 07.08.2019, concerning the additional turnover assessed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner seeks a remand and reconsideration of the issues in the correct legal perspective, urging the court to consider the position in law as it stands today and give effect to the second and third notifications. The petitioner relies on the judgment in Hi-Tek Traders v. Commercial Tax Officer and the issues arising in O.T. Rev. No.29/2022 and batch. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent State.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R [OT.Rev Nos. 32/2021, 61/2021]
S.V.Bhatti, J.
The petitioner/dealer is registered under Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The revisions are directed against the common order dated 06.01.2020 in TA (VAT) No.319 and 320 of 2017. 2. The petitioner is doing business in rubber. The subject matter of revisions relates to assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The Assessing Officer made best assessment judgment and assessed additional turnover on the dealer. The dealer successfully challenged before the Assistant Commissioner, Kannur and Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kozhikode. The revisions have been tagged and heard along with O.T.Rev. 29/2022 and batch since the issues in both sets of matters arise under exemption notifications issued by -4-
the Government, which read as under:
G.O.(P) No.159/2008/TD dated 31.07.2008
G.O.(P) No.181/2011/TD dated 30.11.2011
G.O. (P) No.124/2019/Taxes dated 07.08.2019 O.T. Revisions filed by the state are dismissed and remand ordered by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal has been confirmed.
The attention of this Court is invited to the judgment in Hi-Tek Traders v. Commercial Tax Officer1 and also O.T. Rev. No.29/2022 and batch. The entitlement or eligibility on the subject matter of dispute centers around the three notifications referred to above. Therefore, the issues are reconsidered by taking note of the second and third notifications referred to above, and a view taken by this Court in Hi-Teck traders
1 (2020) 74 GSTR 486 (Ker)
-5-
case. The endeavor of the petitioner is for remand and reconsideration of issues in the right perspective. We are of the view that the Assessing Officer takes note of the position in law as it stands today and gives effect as contemplated by second and third notifications. The orders of the Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), and the Tribunal in both the cases are set aside, and matters remitted to the Assessing Officer for disposal afresh. O.T.Revisions are disposed of as indicated above.
S.V.BHATTI JUDGE
BASANT BALAJI JUDGE
JS -6-
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.