STATE OF KERALA Vs. ALEX V CHACKO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised is whether sales tax recovered and remitted by the awarder from the contractor's bill is to be excluded from the turnover for the computation of tax at compounded rate as provided under S.7(7) of the KGST Act. The assessment involved is for the year 1998-99. Respondent assessee was engaged in civil construction work and he applied for permission to pay tax at compounded rate under S.7(7) of the Act. There is no dispute that the work involved was civil construction work attracting tax at the compounded rate provided under S.7(7) of the Act. Special Government Pleader appearing for the State contended that S.7(7) provides for payment of tax at compounded rate on the whole amount of contract and not on the net amount received by the respondent after recoveries of tax by the awarder. Counsel for the respondent contended that Tribunal was following their earlier order in another case against which State has not filed revision. We do not think the objection of the respondent is tenable because the failure or omission to file revision in another case does not stand in the way of the State filing revision in an appropriate case. The Tribunal's order is binding on the State only for the assessment pertaining to which Tribunal has passed the orders. In other words, for other years or in the case of any other assessee, the State is free to agitate the matter decided by the Tribunal against it. S.7(7) which give rise to this revision case is extracted hereunder: