THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
Kalyan Tourist Home, G B Road, Palakkad, Represented By Its Managing Partner Ajaikumar P. – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala Represented By Its Principal Secretary – Respondent
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
1. These revisions are by an assessee who is eligible to pay tax at compounded rate under Section 7 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, ‘Act’, for short. It is also not in dispute that the assessee is one who has a bar attached hotel of and below two star. This means that if he opts under Section 7 for payment of tax at compounded rate, he would be governed by Section 7(1) (i), which provision has two Clauses - (a) and (b), which operate in alternative. Clause (a) or (b) would apply depending upon which would bring home to the Revenue through the compounded scheme, higher revenue as tax.
2. The assessee applied for payment of tax at compounded rate. That application was not rejected. Obviously therefore, the learned counsel for the assessee is justified in saying that the compounding as was offered, was accepted. But, in the same breath, the assessee would contend through its learned counsel that what has been offered is not merely the option to pay tax at compounded rate, but to pay such compounded rate of tax dependent on Clause (a) and not Clause (b) of Section 7(1)(i) of the Act. This, in our view, is wholly misplaced. It is trite
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.