Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S.FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S.FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS v. STATE OF KERALA - ST Rev No. 254 of 2003 [2007] RD-KL 14184 (26 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

ST Rev No. 254 of 2003()

1. M/S.FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA.
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.ANTONY DOMINIC

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :26/07/2007

O R D E R

H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J.

S.T.Rev.No.254 of 2003

Dated, this the 26th day of July, 2007

ORDER

H.L.Dattu, C.J. This revision petition arises under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and a dealer registered under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act. The company is doing the business of manufacture and sale of fertilizers. (2) This revision petition is filed against the orders passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam in T.A.No.170 of 2000 dated 19th September, 2002 for the assessment year 1993-94. In this revision petition, the assessee has raised 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 Appellate Tribunal was right in law in denying the Petitioner the benefit of the concessional rate of tax under Section 5(3) of the KGST Act and demanding differential tax from the Petitioner? ii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in law in denying the Petitioner the benefit of the concessional rate of tax under Section 5(3) of the KGST Act based on a subsequent nonpayment of tax when the declaration furnished by the Petitioner at the time of purchase of raw naphtha was factually correct in so far as the finished products manufactured and sold by the Petitioner were taxable under the Act?" (3) The learned counsel appearing for the assessee would submit that this Court in T.R.C.Nos.54 and 55 of 2003 disposed of on 12th March, 2003 has answered the legal issues framed by the assessee against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. S.T.Rev.No.254/2003 2 (4) Taking note of the submission made by the learned counsel for the assessee, this revision petition is disposed of by answering the questions of law raised by the assessee, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. (5) Consequently, I.A.No.1890 of 2003 is also dismissed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN)

JUDGE

vns


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.