SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1960 Supreme(Ker) 161

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M. Madhavan Nair, M.R.A. Ansari, JJ.
V. K. M. ABDULSALAM ROWTHER
Versus
STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER.
Tax Revision Case against T.A. No. 122 of 1959 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum. Tax Revision Case No. 89 of 1959
Decided On: Decided On : 21-07-1960

Advocates Appeared:
K. K. Mathew and George Vadakel, for the petitioner.
The Government Pleader, for the respondents.

The assessment year should be a self-contained unit for the purposes of taxation, and events before and after the assessment year are excluded for levying the tax for that year.

Headnote:

Sales Tax - Exemption Claim - General Sales Tax Act, No. XI of 1125 - Section 3, Section 5(vii) - [PEPPER, GINGER, TURMERIC] - [27, 28, 30] - The court discussed the relevant legal provisions of the General Sales Tax Act, No. XI of 1125, particularly Section 3 and Section 5(vii), which specified the point liable to tax on the goods. The court emphasized that the assessment year should be a self-contained unit for the purposes of taxation, and events before and after the assessment year are excluded for levying the tax for that year. The court held that the liability to pay tax on turnover is fixed within the assessment year, and the absence of any express limitation in the notification column does not help the petitioner. The court concluded that the principle of annual taxation should prevail, and any hardship to the taxpayer as a consequence must be borne by the taxpayer.

Fact of the Case:

The revision petitioner, a dealer, claimed exemption on turnover of certain goods under the General Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 1957-58. The taxing authorities disallowed the exemption, leading to the legal issue of whether the authorities correctly disregarded sales beyond the assessment year when the notification levied the sales tax only on the last purchaser within the State.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the revision petition, emphasizing that the assessment year should be a self-contained unit for the purposes of taxation, and events before and after the assessment year are excluded for levying the tax for that year. The court held that the liability to pay tax on turnover is fixed within the assessment year, and the absence of any express limitation in the notification column does not help the petitioner.

Issues: The legal issue raised in the revision petition was whether the taxing authorities correctly disregarded sales beyond the assessment year when the notification levied the sales tax only on the last purchaser within the State.

Ratio Decidendi: The assessment year should be a self-contained unit for the purposes of taxation, and events before and after the assessment year are excluded for levying the tax for that year. The liability to pay tax on turnover is fixed within the assessment year, and the absence of any express limitation in the notification column does not help the petitioner.

Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed by the court, and the petitioner was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 100.

JUDGMENT

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

ANSARI, C.J. - The revision petitioner is the dealer, whose gross turnover for the assessment year 1957-58 was Rs. 6,13,170-91, the net turnover of Rs. 2,68,794-07, and who claims for exemption on turnover of Rs. 3,44,376-84. The Sales Tax Officer, Ponkunnam, has disallowed exemption from tax on the turnover of Rs. 35,666, which is the stock value of pepper, ginger and turmeric, and assessee had on 31st March, 1958. The petitioner's claim for exemption rests on these stocks having been after that date sold to assessable dealers in the State. The appeal against the aforesaid claim being disallowed was filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, Kottayam; but the petitioner failed. The further appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal has also been disallowed. Therefore the legal issued raised in the revision petition is "whether the taxing authorities have correctly disregarded sales beyond the assessment year when the notification levied the sales tax only on the last purchaser within the State, and satisfactory evidence has been led to show the revision petitioner not to be such last purchaser though after the relevant year ?" The learned Advocate for the revision petition has urged that the notification having absolutely stated the sales tax to be levied on the last purchases alone, and the revision petitioner having established his being not such a purchaser, the claim for exemption should not have been disallowed. It would be of advantage to state now the relevant legal provisions.

2. The General Sales Tax Act, No. XI of 1125, hereafter referred to as the Act, defines "year" by section 2(m), to mean "the financial year". Section 3 provides that every dealer shall pay for each year a tax on his total turnover for such year, and the tax shall be calculated at the rates specified in column (3) of Schedule I for every rupee in the turnover relating to the goods noted against them in column (2) thereof, and at the rate of two naye paise for every rupee in the turnover relating to all other goods. The tax would have been multiple, had not section 5(vii) reduced the liability to what has come to be called "single point" tax, and it reads as follows :-

"The sale of goods specified in column (2) of Schedule I shall be liable to tax under section 3, sub-section (1), only at such single point in the series of sales by successive dealers as may be specified by the Government by Notification in the Gazette; and, where the taxable point so specified is a point of sale, the seller shall be liable for the tax on the turnover for which the goods are sold by him at such point, and where the taxable point so specified is a point of purchase, the buyer shall be liable for the tax on the turnover for which the goods are bought by him at such point."

The Government has specified the points in a Notification whose relevant extract runs as follows :-

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (vii) of section 5, of the General Sales Tax Act (Act XI of 1125), the Government of Kerala hereby specify the point mentioned in column 3 of the schedule, hereto appended, as the point liable to tax under section 3(i) on the goods mentioned in column 2.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ S. No. Description of goods. Taxable point. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * * * *

27. Pepper .... Last purchase in the State by a dealer who is not exempt from taxation under section 3(3).

28. Ginger .... Do.

* * * *

30. Turmeric .... Do. "

-----------------------------------










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top