TROPICAL PLANTATIONS LIMITED Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these twenty -three tax revision cases, the two assessees under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, are M/s. Tropical Plantations, Kottayam and M/s. Padinjarekkara Estates Limited, Kodimatha, Kottayam. The particulars of all these twenty -three tax revision cases would be available from the following tabulation :

(2.) WHEN out of these tax revision cases, T.R.C. No. 96 of 1996 relating to the assessment year 1983 -84 came up before us on October 3, 1996, on the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the assessees, all these twenty -three tax revision cases came to be clubbed together by our earlier order with a further direction to place them in a group on October 29, 1996. The tax revision cases were heard extensively yesterday and today. The characteristic fairness of the learned Senior Counsel confined the controversy to the following two questions of law :

(3.) THE petitioners are rubber planters in the context of the question for consideration and consequent decision, and are assessees under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act on the files of the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle, Sales Tax Office, Kottayam. The assessees entered into agreements for sale of the standing rubber trees. Some of the common features of these agreements would be necessary to be born in mind. The agreements mention that rubber trees planted many years back have become old and very uneconomical. The agreements also mention that the trees are being sold with a view to replant rubber in the said areas. The agreements also specify that the rubber trees were standing on the land of the assessees. The agreements provide a further period specified for uprooting and removal of the trees in view of the time required for uprooting the trees, the difficulties in transportation, labour problem, etc. The agreements further provide for the modes and the time periods relating to execution thereof. The assessees contended that the wood of rubber trees is only used as fuel and is never used for construction or building purposes or for repairs to the structures. As a consequence, it was contended that the trees cannot be considered as "timber" within the meaning of section 2(xxvii), Explanation I(ii) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. It is contended that the rubber trees are purely an agricultural produce and, therefore, rubber trees cannot be considered to be "timber" within the statutory provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.