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

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 41348

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.V. BHATTI, BASANT BALAJI, JJ
ABDULLA – Appellant
Versus
AUTHORITY FOR CLARIFICATION – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM), SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR

JUDGMENT

S.V.Bhatti,J.

The instant appeal is filed under Sec.62 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act , 2003 (for short, 'the Act'). The appellant is a registered dealer under the Act and engaged in the purchase of raw rubber both from dealers registered under the Act and also directly from growers. The appeal is filed challenging Annexure-VIII clarification order No.CT/815/17-C3 dated 22.08.2017. In the said Annexure, para 16 refers to S.R.O No.753/2011 dated 30.11.2011.

2. Our attention has been invited by the learned counsel Mr. S. Anil Kumar and learned Senior Government Pleader Mr. V.K Shamsudheen to the operative portion in Annexure-VIII clarification issued by the Department of Commercial Taxes, Kerala. The concluding portion of the clarification is needed to be excerpted for, that could keep in perspective the subsequent narrative in the judgment for disposing of the appeal:

“In view of the notification and the circular issued in this regard, insterstate sales of rubber procured from agriculturalists should have suffered tax under the VAT Act and the CST rate applicable is 0% with 'C' Form. It is further clarified that there shall be no claim of input tax credit/special rebate an

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top