Kerala High Court
Commercial Tax Officer vs M/S. Mar Basil Granites & Metals on 17 December, 2018
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran, Ashok Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1021 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 19574/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER
NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
2 INTELLIGENCE OFFICER
SQUAD NO. IV, IDUKKI AT NEDUMKANDAM.
3 COMMISSIONER OR COMMERCIAL TAXES
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. MAR BASIL GRANITES & METALS
CHATURANGAPARA, UDUMPANCHOLA P.O., IDUKKI
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER
K.C. GEORGE.
BY ADVS.
SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
SMT.MEERA V.MENON
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1009/2015, WA.1023/2015, WA.1031/2015,
WA.1032/2015, WA.1063/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1096/2015,
WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1158/2015,
WA.1292/2015, WA.1927/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1009 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 3485/2015 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
APPELLANT/S:
1 THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA.
2 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. A.S. GRANITES,
PAYYANAMON, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015,
WA.1098/2015, WA.1096/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1023 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 1850/2015 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER SQUAD NO.II OFFICE OF
THE
INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
P J CHACKO
PROPRIETOR, M/S.MOUNT VALLEY GRANITE
INDUSTRIES,VENGATHANAM P.O., PARATHODU,
KANJIRAPPILLY,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 512.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015,
WA.1098/2015, WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015,
WA.1063/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1031 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 14053/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
TAX TOWER, KARAMANA, TRIVANDRUM 695002.
2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE),
COMMERCIAL TAXES, EDAPPALLY PO, ERNAKULAM 682002
3 COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
ANGAMALY 683 572
4 INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
SQUAD NO.IV, COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY AT
ALWAYE 683 572
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
POPPULAR INDUSTRIES,
KUZHITHADAM, MANJIPARA, REP BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER, PAULSON P VARKEY PYNADATH HOUSE,
NAYATHODE PO ANGAMALY 683 572
BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016, WA.1158/2015,
WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1032 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 17596/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PEERMADE
686 531.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S.KINATTUKARA METAL CRUSHER
CHENKARA P.O, SANKARAGIRI, PULLUMEDU, IDUKKI
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
MATHEW JOSEPH.
BY ADVS.
SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
SMT.MEERA V.MENON
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1927/2016, WA.1158/2015,
WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1063 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 29184/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, NEYYATTINKARA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
K.K.ROCKS & GRANITES INDIA PVT. LTD
REGISTERED OFFICE AT KOTTAKKAL, TC 2/3497,
PATTAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004, REP. BY
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015,
WA.1098/2015, WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1081 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 14041/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 AUTHORITY FOR CLARIFICATION,REPRESENTED
BY JOINT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL
TAXES, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 002.
2 COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
TAX TOWER, KARAMANA, TRIVANDRUM-695 002.
3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR-680 003.
4 COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
IRINJALAKUDA, PIN-680 121.
5 INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, IRINJALAKKUDA-680 121.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
EDATHADAN GRANITES,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER-E.N.SHAJAN,
OMBATHUNGAL, MATTATHUR PO, THRISSUR-680 684.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015,
WA.1098/2015, WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1096 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 222/2015 of HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
APPELLANT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES,
GOVT.SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
KVAT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL
TAXES, KOTTAYAM-686001.
BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
P.J.CHACKO
PROPRIETOR, M/S.MOUNT VALLEY GRANITE
INDUSTRIES, VENGATHANAM P.O., PARATHODU
KANJIRAPPILLY,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686512.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.11.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015,
WA.1098/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1097 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 14237/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
SQUAD NO.VIII, COMMERCIAL TAXES,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AT NEYYATTINKARA,
PIN - 695 121.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. METRO AGGREGATES AND SAND INDIA PVT. LTD.,
32/2982, B1, SAHRUDAYA BUILDINGS,
PONNURUNNI, VYTTILA, KOCHI - 682 019,
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, KURIKKAL JOSEPH PAUL.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1098 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 2873/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY SECRETARY TAXES,
GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
SQUAD NO.1, COMMERCIAL TAXES,
IDUKKI AT KATTAPPANA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
3 COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
FIRST CIRCLE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
GEORGE KOCHUPARAMBIL
PROPRIETOR, M/S.UNITED GRANIT AND METALS,
VAZHITHALA.P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI
DISTRICT.685 583.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
11
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1157 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 4579/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA,
3RD FLOOR, REVENUE TOWER, THIRUVALLA.
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
TAXES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. PANACHAYIL INDUSTRIES,
CHARAKUNNU, HEAD OFFICE AT PANACHAYIL BUILDING,
WEST OTHARA, THIRUVALLA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1292/2015, WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1158 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 18085/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT,
KERALA STATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL SALES TAX, SQUAD NO.1,
IDUKKI - 685 582.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. THOMSON GRANITES,
WEST KODIKULAM, THODUPUZHA - 685 582,
REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, GEORGE THOMAS.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1292 of 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 18271/2014 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 06-04-2015
APPELLANT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
TAXES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
SQUAD NO.11, COMMERCIAL TAXES,
PATHANAMTHITTA, 3RD FLOOR,
REVENUE TOWER, THIRUVALLA, PIN -689 101.
3 THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,COMMERCIAL TAXES,
PATHANAMTHITTA, 3RD FLOOR, REVENUE TOWER,
THIRUVALLA, PIN - 689 101.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. AMITY ROCK PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,
CHUNKAPARA, MALLAPPALLY,
PATHANAMTHITTA,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR,ABRAHAM K.THOMAS - 689 594.
BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1927/2016,
WA.1158/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WA.No. 1927 of 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 5229/2015 of HIGH COURT
OF KERALA DATED 12-07-2016
APPELLANT/S:
M/S. KANNAMTHANAM AND CO.,
MALAYAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.J.THOMASKUTTY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.)
SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
SRI.GEORGE A.CHERIAN
SRI.PAUL JACOB (P)
SRI.RONY JOSE
SRI.S.SREEDEV
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR SQUAD NO.VII, NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C E UNNIKRISHNAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2018,
ALONG WITH WA.1031/2015, WA.1032/2015, WA.1158/2015,
WA.1292/2015, WA.1157/2015, WA.1097/2015, WA.1098/2015,
WA.1096/2015, WA.1009/2015, WA.1081/2015, WA.1063/2015,
WA.1023/2015, WA.1021/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
15
W.A Nos.1021/2015, 1023/2015,
1031/2015, 1032/2015, 1063/2015,
1081/2015, 1009/2015, 1096/2015,
1098/2015, 1097/2015, 1157/2015,
1292/2015, 1158/2015, 1927/2016
J U D G M E N T
Vinod Chandran, J These appeals were disposed of by a common judgment dated 12.11.2018, rejecting the contentions of the State and upholding the judgment of the learned Single Judge which was impugned by the State in the various appeals. The batch of appeals were hence dismissed. However, this Court failed to notice that one of the appeals, namely W.A No.1927/2016, was filed by the assessee against the issuance of of a notice under Section 67 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, threatening imposition of penalty. Since the appeals were dismissed by a W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
16 common judgment, necessarily the judgment has to be recalled. Hence we recalled the common judgment dated 12.11.2018. However, since there is absolutely no change in the findings, we pass the following judgment.
2. The issue raised in the above writ appeals is as to whether the M-Sand produced by the various writ petitioners by using a vertical/horizontal shaft impactor machine is liable to separate assessment under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for brevity KVAT Act); even when the dealers had opted for compounding under Section 8 of the Act.
3. The learned Single Judge based on the
(i) proviso to Section 8, (ii) the fact that there was a subsequent amendment made bringing in a separate compounded fee for VSI/HSI from the year 2014-15 as also (iii) the judgment of W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
17 a Division Bench reported in 2011 (4) KHC 876 [ State of Kerala V. Poabs Granits P.Ltd.] found the dealers to be not liable to be separately assessed for the M-Sand produced by VSI/HSI, for the relevant period.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader has put forth compelling arguments in challenge of the findings of the learned Single Judge. It is pointed out that Poabs Granites P.Ltd.(supra) was in the general sales tax regime and has no application to the KVAT Act. It is also argued, on a reading of Section 8(b) that only dealers producing granite metals would be entitled to compounding under the provision. Hence any other product distinct from granite metal would not be covered under the compounding scheme and such products would have to readily concede to assessment under the W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
18 regular provisions, especially for reason of there being no compounding scheme for that product. The dealers when they produce M-Sand by VSI/HSI are not absolved from the assessment of that product which does not fall under the categorization of granite metals. The proviso, according to the learned Government Pleader, specifically intended that the M-Sand produced with the machines as seen in clause (b) of Section 8 alone would be exempted. It is the further argument that the exemption was only on account of such M-Sand obtained as a by-product, in production of granite metals in the machines specified in sub-section (b) of Section 8 would be of a negligible quantity and also inferior quality. The budget speech for the assessment year in which there was introduction of VSI/HSI also under the W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
19 compounding scheme, has also been relied on to further buttress the intention of the legislature in having provided the coverage under the scheme only prospectively from the assessment year 2014-15.
5. We have heard learned Special Government Pleader Sri. C.E Unnikrishnan for the State and Sri. S.Sreedev for the assessee- appellant. The learned Senior Counsel Sri Raju Joseph & Sri. T.M. Sreedharan as also Sri. Harisankar V Menon, Dr.George Abraham, Sri K.I. Mayankutty Mather, Sri. K.T Poulose, Sri. N. James Koshy, Smt. R.Leela, Sri.Philip J Vettickattu, Sri. Mathew A. Kuzhalnadan appeared for the respondents in the various appeals.
6. Section 8 has been extracted by the learned Single Judge in the judgment and we deem it appropriate that the proviso alone be extracted herein.
W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
20
"Provided that in the case of dealers, who opted to pay compounded tax under this clause, no separate assessment shall be made in respect of [Manufactured sand} produced by them."
7. The proviso clearly exempts manufactured sand produced by dealers engaged in the production of granite metals who have opted for compounding based on the specification in Sub clause (i) to
(iv) of Clause (b) of Section 8. There is no reference to an inferior quality or negligible quantity of M-Sand which alone stands exempted. It cannot also be said that the M-Sand procured from the VSI/HSI are not produced by the machines referred to in Section 8(b). The crusher units use different machines for production of granite metal. The quarried metal of large size is first reduced to smaller size in the primary crusher and then crushed to still smaller aggregates in the secondary crushers. The VSI/HSI is used to further W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
21 crush the smaller aggregates to fine sand which along with the crusher sand obtained from the primary and secondary crushers are called M-Sand. Though they are of different quality the terminology is the same and both are saleable as M-Sand in the market.
8. The learned Single Judge found that it was not in dispute that the products,namely granite metal, crusher sand and manufactured sand are all obtained during the process of production of granite metal using mechanised crushing machines. M-Sand was also found to be a product that is obtained in the process of production of granite metal using mechanised crushing machines. It was specifically held that the mere fact that a dealer had obtained a different type of machine for production of a finer size of granite metal or sand was of no consequence. We agree with the findings; on the legislative scheme envisaging the payment of W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
22 compounded fee on the basis of the number of primary and secondary crushers used within a crusher unit. A different type of machine not specifically noticed by the legislature, if and when used by the crusher units, to produce the same product but of a different constitution, for which no separate compounding fee was provided; would not by such user alone make liable the dealers for a separate regular assessment on the M-Sand produced by such machines in the crusher units; which units have admittedly opted to pay tax under the compounding scheme. We specifically notice the proviso extracted above, which speaks of dealers who opt under the compounding scheme, to be not liable to separate assessment in respect of Manufactured Sand produced by them; ie: produced by the dealers or the specific units. If, as contended by the learned Special Government Pleader the exemption was with respect to the M-Sand produced W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
23 by the machines referred to in Section 8(b) ie: the primary and secondary crusher machines, then the exemption would have been worded otherwise. It would have been specifically with respect to M-Sand produced by the machines and not by the dealers or the units as the proviso is now worded.
9. Section 8(b) is very clear and indicates compounding fee only on the specific machines provided there under with respect to a dealer producing granite metals. True, the legislature never contemplated the introduction of vertical or horizontal shaft impactors for the purpose of producing M-Sand from the granite metal produced by a separate process through an impactor. The exemption granted, did not exclude such production by a separate machine other than that specified in clause (b) of Section 8. The exemption granted as per the proviso applies across the board to any production of manufactured sand made by the W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
24 dealers producing granite metals whether it be from the machines as specified in Clause (b) or otherwise. The compounding scheme also is for the dealers or the crushing units and on option exercised, they are absolved from regular assessment of the goods produced in the crusher units whether it be larger or smaller aggregates of granite metal or M-Sand by a VSI/HSI.
10. We also notice that the legislature having found that there is a loss of tax insofar as the M- Sand produced by a different machine had from the assessment year 2014-15 provided a compounding fee for the VSI/HSI. The provision so introduced was also on the following reasoning as available in the budget speech of the Finance Minister:
"Due to scarcity of river sand, the new product called manufactured sand, produced by crushing granite stones, is currently being used widely in construction. As per W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.25
the present provision, a compounded quarry producing granite metals need not pay any tax for quarry dust, a bye-product in the process. Taking advantage of this exemption, many units which primarily produce manufactured sand using dedicated machines, are claiming tax exemption in case of manufactured sand, causing tax loss to the Government. In order to curtail this, it is proposed to introduce a separate compounding provision for manufactured sand. To study the practical issues involved in this matter, a special committee consisting of the Officers of Commercial Taxes Department was set-up. The proposed scheme is based on the study report of the said Committee. It is proposed to introduce an annual compounding scheme for manufactured sand based on the production capacity of the machines used for this purpose, i.e., vertical shaft impactor/horizontal shaft impactor, in the following five slabs".
11. The speech itself indicates that the Government realised a drain of tax insofar as an W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
26 exemption provided to manufactured or M-Sand by the proviso. It was then sought to introduce a compounding fee for the VSI/HSI also separately. This in fact further fortifies the contention of the dealers that prior to such introduction they were entitled to the exemption, whether the M-Sand produced in the Units, which opted for compounding, did so from the crushers or the impactors. We do not also see any reason to sustain the distinction sought to be drawn between M-Sand and manufactured sand. M-Sand as it is generally understood is manufactured sand produced from quarried metals. In common parlance as also in commercial parlance M-Sand is manufactured sand produced from metals, as distinguished from natural sand.
12. We have also seen Poabs Granite P.Ltd. (supra) which decision was under the general sales tax regime. The compounding provision under the general sales tax enactment did not have a W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
27 provision for exemption as is available in the KVAT Act. Even then a Division Bench of this Court found that there could be no separate assessment for manufactured sand produced from a different machine when such machine was not included under the compounding scheme and provided with a distinct compounding fee. In the present regime under the KVAT Act, there was a specific exemption with respect to manufactured sand produced by the dealers who were primarily engaged in producing granite metals and who had opted for compounding. We hence find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge and dismiss the appeals filed by the State.
13. In W.A No.1927/2016, the assessee impugned the judgment of the learned Single Judge refusing to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226 to interfere with a notice issued under Section 67 of the KVAT Act. We specifically notice W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
28 that the learned Single Judge found that if the notice is issued only with reference to the interpretation of Section 8(b), the issue would be covered by the decision in Mar Basil Granites and Metals v. Commercial Tax Officer [(2015) 2 KLT 58]. The decision in Mar Basil Granites and Metals (supra) have now been upheld by us in the appeals of the State. A reading of the notice under Section 67 indicates that the grounds raised for the proceedings under Section 67 is only non-disclosure of the installation of Vertical Shaft Impactor for the manufacture of M-sand. The allegation of books of accounts being not maintained correctly, is also on the ground that the manufacture of M-sand and metal sand and the data of sale in M-sand are not correctly shown. We have held that M-sand, as the provision existed in the subject assessment year was not exigible to tax when compounding has been applied for and sanctioned. We hence set aside the W.A No.1021 of 2015 and conn.
29 judgment of the learned Single Judge and allow the appeal setting aside Ext.P2 notice issued under Section 67 of the KVAT Act. W.A No.1927/2016 hence would stand allowed.
Ordered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs; which the respective parties shall bear.
Sd/-
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge Sd/-
Ashok Menon, Judge jma