E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND M.P. THAKKAR, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 1725 (NT) of 1977, D/- 12-3-1986.
Bakul Cashew Co. and others, Appellants
Versus
Sales Tax Officer, Quilon and another, Respondents.
Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 - Section 10, 10(3), 5, 10(l) - Kerala Act 19 of 1980 - Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - Section 2(ab) - Cashew-Nut Factory - Imported from African Countries - Delay in Making Assessment of Tax - Cashew processors owning and/or working cashew factories wherein nearly about 80 per cent of raw nuts processed were being imported during relevant time from African countries - Import of raw nuts was canalised through Cashew Corporation of India and they were allotted to appellants and various other factory owners who were engaged in business of processing cashewnuts - It appears that there was delay in making assessment of tax payable by them under during the periods and Department commenced to make assessment - Government in meanwhile had issued notification granting exemption to cashew manufacturers for period and had later on cancelled it by notification within about three weeks from date on which exemption had been-granted - Whether any of appellants acted on basis of said representation and how he was prejudiced - Whether plea of promissory estoppel can be raised against a legislation which levies tax and whether an assessee can claim exemption from a tax levied by legislature merely on basis of a representation of a minister – Held, Impugned notification which granted exemption for earlier period was ineffective - It was also not shown that relying upon notification appellants had done any act which attracted rule of estoppels - Authority which can issue a notification may cancel it also - Section 10(3) of Act confers such power of cancellation expressly - State Government did so and cancelled earlier notification as there was a public hue and cry that State Government had shown undue favour to Kerala cashew-nut factory owners at a time when State passing through grave and difficult financial position - Moreover transactions in question related to past period - Before concluding court may refer to a submission made on behalf of appellants that by virtue of amendment by Act 103 of 1976 to Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 by introduction of S. 2(ab) in it, they are entitled to certain relief – Court have not considered effect of said amendment on transactions in question – Court express no opinion on it - It is open to appellants to raise point in assessment proceedings or in any other proceedings under Act which may be pending now - Appeal dismissed.
Judgement
VENKATARAMIAH, J. :- This appeal by special leave is filed against the judgment dated December 1, 1976 in the petition bearing Writ Petition No. O. P. 1740 of 1976 on the file of the Kerala High Court filed by the aforementioned 26 appellants and 20 others. They prayed in the Writ Petition inter alia for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus to the State Government of Kerala to give effect to the notification issued by the State Government bearing No.G.O.Ms. 127/73/ID dated October 12, 1973 under Section 10 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (15 of 1963) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by which the State Government had retrospectively granted an exemption in respect of the tax payable under Section 5 of the said Act by the cashew manufacturers in that State on the purchase turnover of cashewnuts imported from outside India through the Cashew Corporation of India for the period berween September 1, 1970 and September 30, 1973 after quashing the subsequent notification bearing No. G.O. Ms. 143/73/TD dated November 9, 1973 issued under Section 10(3) of the Act cancelling the above said notification dated October 12, 1973. The appellants and the other persons who had filed the writ petition before the High Court are cashew processors owning and/or working cashew factories wherein nearly about 80 per cent of the raw nuts processed were being imported during the relevant time from African countries. The import of raw nuts was canalised through the Cashew Corporation of India and they were allotted to the appellants and various other factory owners who were engaged in the business of processing cashewnuts. It appears that there was delay in making the assessment of tax payable by them under Section 5 of the Act during the periods 1970 to 1974 and the Department commenced to make assessment in or about the year 1974. The Government in the meanwhile had issued the notification dated October 12, 1973 granting exemption to cashew manufacturers for the period between September 1, 1970 and September 30, 1973 and had later on cancelled it by notification dated November 9, 1973 within about three weeks from the date on which the exemption had been-granted. It is not necessary to refer to all the allegations made in the writ petition for purposes of this case since the only point urged before us relates to the right of the appellants to secure the exemption as stated in the notification dated October 12, 1973 by virtue of the rule of promissory estoppel. The appellants urged two contentions before the High Court in support of their plea : (i) that the Government was precluded by the rule of promissory estoppel from claiming the purchase tax in respect of cashewnuts imported from African countries and (ii) that the exemption that had been granted on October 12, 1973 could not be withdrawn by the subsequent notification issued on November 9, 1973. In support of first limb of their argument the appellants depended upon the representation which was alleged to have been made on behalf of the Government by the Chief Minister, the Industries Minister and the Revenue Minister at a meeting held on April 25, 1971 and in support of their second contention they depended upon Section 10 of the Act. The Government contested the case of the appellants on both these points. The High Court upheld the case of the State Government and rejected the said contentions. It however, directed the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal to make assessments taking into account the other contentions of the assessees. This appeal by special leave is filed against the judgment of the High Court of Kerala in the said writ petition.
2. The allegations regarding the plea based on promissory estoppel ore found in Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the petition which reads thus :-
" 10. When the scheme of canalisation came to be introduced in September, 1970, the members of the cashew industry like the first petitioner were keen that the purchases of raw cashew nuts
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.