STATE OF KERALA Vs. M R F LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). THE State is the revision petitioner. THE assessee is the respondent. THE assessment year concerned is 1987-88. THE only question involved in this revision is as to whether the assessee is entitled to avail the concessional rate of tax on the sale of tyres in terms of the Notification S. R. O. No. 453/1983 for the period from December 26, 1987 to March 31, 1988 notwithstanding the supersession of the said notification by S. R. O. No. 1716/1987.

(2.) THE assessee-company was having two rubber purchase depots at Kottayam and Kozhikode and two sales depots at Ernakulam and Kozhikode and a factory at Vadavathoor in Kottayam District. During the assessment year 1987-88 the assessee had, inter alia, effected sale of tyres and had collected and remitted tax only at the rate of 10 per cent as against the rate of 15 per cent applicable to tyres under entry 206 of the First Schedule to the Act in the light of the notification S. R. O. No. 453/1983. THE assessing authority completed the assessment for the year 1987-88 as per order dated February 27, 1998 accepting the same. Subsequently the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Kottayam, initiated suo motu proceedings under section 35 of the Act stating that in view of the supersession of S. R. O. No. 453/1983 by S. R. O. No. 1716/1987 dated December 26, 1987, the assessee is not eligible for the concessional rate of tax on the sale of tyres from December 26, 1987. After considering the objection filed by the assessee, the Deputy Commissioner set aside the assessment order dated February 27, 1998 and remanded the case to the assessing authority for fresh disposal in accordance with law. THE assessee had challenged the said order in appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kottayam, in T. A. No. 59 of 1999. THE assessee and the department had filed two other appeals, i. e. , T. A. Nos. 60 of 1999 and 101 of 1999 respectively on other matters with which we are not concerned in this revision.

(3.) THE Tribunal had accepted the contention of the assessee by relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Titaghur Paper Mills case [1985] 60 STC 213, and the explanatory note to S. R. O. No. 1716/1987 and held that the Notification S. R. O. No. 453/1983 continued to be in existence in respect of the three items not covered by S. R. O. No. 1716/1987. In that view, the Tribunal has set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Kottayam.