MINI STEELS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE tax revision cases relate to the assessments made on the assessee for the years 1981-82, 1985-86, 1983-84 and 1982-83. Assessee is the petitioner in T. R. C. No. 6 of 1990 while the Revenue is the petitioner in the other three tax revision cases. The assessee sells iron and steel materials produced by one M/s. Loharu Steel Industries, Bangalore. Assessee claims that they have purchased these goods locally from three dealers Sandeep Steel Suppliers, Cochin, Southern Steel and Alloys, Cochin and Rukmini Steel Industries Ltd. , Cochin, in the first year and from these three dealers and from Standard Dealers, Palakkad, in the subsequent three years. The case is that these dealers purchased the goods locally from M/s. Loharu Steel Industries and that they have paid the tax due on the sales effected by them to the assessee. The assessee's case therefore is that they were not the first sellers of these iron and steel materials and that their sales could not be brought to tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.

(2.) THE Revenue on the other hand takes the stand that the purchases effected by the assessee were all purchases in the course of inter-State trade resulting in the assessee being the first seller of these goods within the State liable to tax under the Act.

(3.) BOTH sides are agreed before us that the facts-situation for 1981-82 and for the subsequent years was the same and that the same course of transactions was being followed for all these years. But we are now faced with a situation where the Tribunal has on the same facts-situation arrived at a particular finding of fact for 1981-82 and just the contrary finding for the subsequent years. It is not possible for this Court to appreciate the evidence or to arrive at a finding of fact as to the nature of the transactions of the assessee, when this court is exercising only revisional jurisdiction, and the question whether the transactions in question are inter-State purchases or not is essentially a question of fact. In this state of the conflicting findings rendered by the Tribunal it will only be appropriate for the Tribunal to deal with the matter afresh taking all the appeals together and arriving at a definite finding of fact in the first instance as to the nature of the transactions of the assessee in relation to the disputed sales and purchases. Without such a finding being arrived at, it will not be possible for this Court to render a decision on the question arising in these tax revision cases. We are therefore constrained to remit the matters back to the Tribunal for considering the matters afresh, to decide in the first instance as to the nature of the transactions of the assessee and then to apply the law and arrive at a decision whether the assessee is the first seller within the State liable to tax under the Act. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of these cases in view of the conflicting findings rendered by the Tribunal in the matter.