SUPERSONIC INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Denial of the claim for refund, in respect of exemption from the liability to pay purchase tax with retrospective effect is the point involved. The petitioner, an assessee on the rolls of the first respondent, is a dealer engaged in the business connected with the commodity 'rubber'. By virtue of the relevant provisions of law, tax was payable on purchase turnover of rubber and the petitioner was remitting the same accordingly, in connection with the manufacture of centrifuged latex and crumb rubber.

(2.) While so, the Government, in exercise of the power conferred under Section 10 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (KGST Act in short) issued Ext. P2 notification bearing SRO No. 695/2003, finding it necessary in the public interest so to do and exempted the manufacturers of centrifuged latex and crumb rubber from payment of tax under the KGST Act, 1963 on the purchase turnover of rubber in any form used for the manufacture of centrifuged latex and crumb rubber. It was also stated that the said notification shall be deemed to have been in force during the period from 01.04.1988 to 09.10.2001. It was further stipulated that, "tax, if any, already paid shall not be refunded". The exemption granted as per the said notification was further extended from 10.10.2001 to 31.03.2004, as per Ext. P3 notification bearing SRO No. 316 of 2005 dated 31.03.2005. In the said notification, it was stipulated that, "tax collected shall be paid over to Government immediately and tax if any, already paid shall not be refunded".

(3.) As a matter of fact, in respect of the assessment year 2001-02, the petitioner had already remitted purchase tax amounting to a total sum of Rs. 1,09,495/-. But in view of the subsequent notifications as aforesaid, providing exemption retrospectively w.e.f. 01.04.1988 to 31.03.2004, the petitioner claimed refund at the time of assessment. The request was declined and the assessment was completed as per Ext. P1 assessment order dated 17.11.2005, which is under challenge in this writ petition.