K. Vinod Chandran, J.

The revisions arise respectively from the

order of penalty and an order of assessment for the

year 2005-2006. The question raised is common and the

only additional question would be as to whether penalty

would lie in view of the doubt expressed as to which

Entry the product would be covered by. The questions of

law are re-framed as follows:

“In the facts and circumstances of

the case whether the Tribunal was

correct in having held that the subject

goods manufactured and sold by the

appellant were correctly assessed at the

higher rate under S.R.O 82 of 2006 of

the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003

(for brevity KVAT Act) ? and

“Whether, in the context of a genuine

doubt as to the product description as

per the Entries in the various

Schedules, the penalty imposed though

modified was rightly imposed at all, by

the Tribunal?”

2. The issue arises in so far as the products

of the assessee referred to in the assessment order at

4

Annexure A produced in OT[Rev.] No.193 of 2015. They

are toasted bread, crunch toast, sweet toast and milk

toast. Whether they are assessable under Entry 6 of

the First Schedule or Entry 7 of the Third Schedule or

Entry 11 of SRO 82/