STATE OF KERALA Vs. ANITHA BALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision if filed by the State against the order of the Tribunal rejecting it's claim that hair dye is a cosmetic taxable at the rate of 20% under entry 127 of the first schedule to the KGST Act. Since notice could not be served on the respondent, this court directed the State to effect service through newspaper publication. Copy of the newspaper publication is produced in court towards proof of substituted service of notice. Inspite of publication in the newspaper, respondent has not appeared in court. Therefore, we heard learned Government Pleader and proceed to dispose of the case on merits.

(2.) THERE is no entry in the first schedule to the KGST Act specifically covering hair dye. However entry 127 covers perfumes and cosmetics not mentioned elsewhere in the schedule. For easy reference the said entry is extracted hereunder: TABLE

(3.) IT is clear from the above meaning contained in the dictionary that cosmetics are items used to improve the appearance superficially and items restoring or enhancing normal appearance are known as cosmetic preparation. Hair dye generally used is for the purpose of restoration of original colour of the hair that is back when hair starts graying. There can be no doubt that the purpose of restoration of original colour through the application of dye is only to improve the appearance. We are therefore of the view that hair dye is nothing but a cosmetic and the Tribunal went wrong in holding that it is not covered by entry 127 of the first schedule of the KGST Act. We therefore, allow the Tax Revision case filed by the State by reversing the order of the Tribunal and restoring the assessment of hair dye as cosmetic taxable at 20% under entry 127 of the first schedule of the KGST Act. ===========================================================================