Dattu, C.J.

M/s. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd. is the revision petitioner in this Sales Tax Revision Petition. It is a co-operative society dealing in milk and milk products. The petitioner is a registered dealer both under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax.

2. Petitioner had filed its annual returns claiming exemption on the sales turnover of "Amul Tazza Milk" which according to it is only "pasteurised milk" coming under Entry 23 of Third Schedule to Kerala General Sales Tax Act. The assessing authority while concluding the assessment for the assessment year 2000- 2001 has levied the tax at 12% treating "Amul Tazza Milk" as a milk product as such an item falling under Entry 92 of the First Schedule to the Act.

3. The assessee being aggrieved by the said finding and conclusion reached by the Assessing Authority had approached the higher forum by filing an appeal. The Appellate Authority has concurred with the findings and conclusion reached by the Assessing Authority. Thereafter the assessee has carried the matter by way of second appeal before the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal by order dated 30-9-2004 has rejected the appeal and has confirmed the orders passed by the Assessing Authority. The Tribunal would hold that the "Amul Tazza Milk" is a milk product and, therefore, it falls under Entry 92 of the First Schedule. The reasoning and conclusions reached by the Tribunal is as under:

"Evidently and admittedly Tazza Milk has undergone pasteurization and toning. It is also subjected to Ultra High Temperature. Besides, there is an addition of Vitamin A and D to the Tazza Milk. According to the appellant, pasteurization at 63°C and the subsequent treatment at Ultra High -temperature of 135°C for three seconds, there occurs a deduction in nutrition and hence vitamins A and D are added to compensate the loss of nutrition due to treatment of UHT pasteurisation. It is argued by the appellant that this treatment will not change the identity of the commodity. The appellant would practically admit that the milk has undergone a degree of processing, but the argument is that the product is still retaining its functional identity, since there is no difference in identity before and after processing. Evidently, the Tazza Milk has undergone a degree of processing and the appellant himself has treated it as manufacture by indicating it on the cover of the package. After having endorsed as a manufactured item the appellant is estopped from contending otherwise. In that view of the matter, it is not necessary for us to go into the meaning of the item in commercial parlance and common parlance and the functional character of the item."

4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee has come beret us in this revision petition. The question of law raised for our consideration and decision is whether the Tribunal is justified in classifying "Amul Tazza Milk" as not pasteurised milk after admitting that the process adopted by the assessee is only pasteurisation?

5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the `Tazza Milk' sold by the assessee would fall under Entry 23 of the Third Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (the Act for short) and, therefore, is exempt from payment of tax under the Act. It is further contended that merely because vitamins A and D are added to the pasteurized milk, it would not lose its identity as a pasteurized milk. He, therefore, submits that the authorities under the Act and the Tribunal were not justified in holding that "Amul Tazza Milk" is a milk product and would fall under Entry 92 of the First Schedule to the Act.

6. Per contra, Sri Ashokan, learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) would submit, that, the Tazza Milk cannot be construed as a pasteurized milk for the reason, that, when Tazza Milk is processed and sold, the assessee would add vitamins A and D to the pasteurized milk and ther