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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 5265

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.V. BHATTI, BASANT BALAJI, JJ
P.M.SANKARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
OT.Rev 37 2020



Advocates:
K.N.SREEKUMARAN, SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR, SRI.N.SANTHOSHKUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER, GP M.M JASMIN

The judgment clarifies that specific entries in tax legislation take precedence over general ones when determining tax applicability.

Headnote:

Taxation - Kerala Value Added Tax Act - Sections 6(1)(d), Schedule III - The court interpreted Entry 7 and Entry 8 of Schedule III to ascertain the applicable tax rate on food preparations, ultimately recognizing the specific application of Entry 8 for the products sold by the petitioner.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, challenges the Tribunal's dismissal of their appeal regarding the applicable tax rate on food items. The dispute centers on whether the items fall under Entry 7 or Entry 8 of Schedule III.

Issues: The main issues include the justification of the Tribunal's tax classification, the applicability of tax rates under Entries 7 and 8, and whether the Tribunal disregarded legislative intent.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the specific provisions of Entry 8 prevailed over the general provisions of Entry 7, allowing for a 5% tax rate for the food items sold by the petitioner.

Final Decision: The court set aside the Tribunal's order and allowed the revision, confirming a 5% tax rate under Entry 8.

O R D E R

S.V. Bhatti, J.

We have heard Mr K.N. Sreekumaran learned counsel for the revision petitioner and learned Government Pleader Smt.

M.M Jasmin.

2. The petitioner/dealer registered under Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, ‘the Act’) challenges the order of the Tribunal dated 14.01.2020 in TA (VAT) No.105/2019 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam. The revision petitioner raised the following questions of law:

“i) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in dismissing the appeal on the ground that the food items like halva, mixture, laddu and jilebi sold by the petitioner would fall under Entry 11 of SRO 82/2006 notified under sec. 6(1)(d) of the KVAT Act in disregard of the definite and specific entry 8 of Schedule III of the KVAT Act which was inserted by the Kerala Finance Act

2014?

ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in not distinguishing the ratio of the decision of this Hon'ble Court in O.T. (Rev) 120/2014 in Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in M/s. Perfect Agencies Vs. State of Kerala where the residuary entry 66 of 82/06 specifically contained the disputed item mosquito repellents unlike "entry 11 of SRO 82/06 which do not include the items like halva, mixture, laddu and jilebi?

iii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in interpreting the amended entry 8 of Schedule III ignoring the Legislative intention in inserting the above entry by the Finance Act 2014 as discernible from the Budget speech of the Hon'ble Finance Minister for unifying the rate of tax of the foods products items like halva, mixture, laddu and jilebi without branded/unbranded classification?

iv) Whether the Appellate tribunal is justified in not applying the rate of tax on the sale of items like halva, mixture, laddu and jilebi under the amended entry 8 as against entry 7 relating to bakery products sold under brand name in accordance with the settled Rules of Interpretation that the construction favourable to the assessee has to be adopted assuming that there is some ambiguity?”

3. The petitioner admittedly is in the business of manufacturing food preparations/items like mixture, jilebi, laddu, murukku, achappam, pakkavada, and unniyappam in the traditional Kerala style and marketing the said products under the brand name or monogram as “Fresh Products”. In the revision, the disputes related to the applicable rate of tax on the turnover from the sale of products referred to above are 5% or 14.5%. There is no dispute on the food preparations manufactured and sold by the petitioner. The petitioner filed the returns for the year 2014-15 by returning the total taxable turnover as Rs.5,33,71,912/- and paid tax at 5% under Entry 8 of Schedule III. The Assessing Authority completed the assessment by levying tax at 14.5% under Entry 11 as applicable under notification dated 21.01.2006 read with Kerala Finance Act (Act

29 of 2013).

4. The case of the dealer is that prior to 01.04.2015, the common, comprehensive Entry dealing with bakery products provided for payment of tax at 5% for all the bakery products such as sweets, confectionery, and other food products other than or except the products sold under the brand name registered under Trade Marks Act, 1999. Through Kerala Finance Act, 2014 (Act 29 of 2014), Entry 8 has been incorporated in Schedule III. For the subject return period, tax is payable at 5% but not by referring to Entry 7 of Schedule III. The Tribunal and the Statutory Authorities do not accept the argument of the dealer. Hence the revision.

5. We are not proposing to examine the reasoning and whether such reasoning is available in the facts and circumstances of the case. In a sequential manner, we would like to appreciate which one of the two Entries, viz. Entry 7 or 8 is attracted to the taxable turnover shown by the petitioner. To appreciate the controversy in a very limited compass, the relevant Entries are excerpted hereunder: 7. Ba

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 Back to top