1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 5037 OF 2007

HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF KERALA Respondent(s)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2343-2347 OF 2008

O R D E R

The appellants in these appeals are operating several

rubber plantations and are engaged in the production of raw

rubber which is sold by them to various trader. It is those

traders who re-sell the same to the manufacturer of rubber

products. The appellants are exigible to sales tax under

the provisions of Central Sales Tax Act. The assessing

officer while making assessments held that the rubber cess,

which is payable under the Rubber Act, 1947 (in short 'the

Rubber Act') by the manufacturer, be treated as the part of

sales tax turn over and assessed sales tax thereupon. The

appellants challenged the said orders with the submission

that as the appellants were not paying any rubber cess at

all nor is it payable by them under the provisions of the

Rubber Act, the notional amount of rubber cess cannot be

Digitally signed by

NEELAM GULATI

Date: 2016.04.13

13:01:17 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

2

included in the sales tax turn over. This contention of the

appellant have been rejected till the stage of High Court as

by the impugned judgment of the High Court, revision

petitions of the appellants have been dismissed.

It has been held in the case of M/s. Jullunder Rubber

Goods Manufacturers' Association vs. Union of India & Anr.

1969 (2) SCC 644 that it is the manufacturer of the rubber

products alone which is liable to pay cess under the Rubber

Act. It is clear from the above that the liability to pay

the rubber cess is only that of a manufacturer and the event

of liability is the manufacture of goods and not earlier.

The stage of sale of goods by the appellant was much prior

to the taxable event of rubber cess. The appellants herein,

as pointed out above, were neither paying the rubber cess

nor collecting the same from the traders with whom they have

sold the goods. Therefore, the rubber cess could not be

included, that to on notional basis, in the sales turn over

of the appellant. The appeals are accordingly allowed and

the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside.

…................J

(A.K. SIKRI)

….…..............J

(ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)

NEW DELHI

April 04, 2016

ITEM NO.303 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIIA

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal No(s). 5037/2007

HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF KERALA Respondent(s)

WITH

C.A. No. 2343-2347/2008

(With Office Report)

Date : 04/04/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

For Appellant(s)

Mr. C. N. Sree Kumar,Adv.

Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. R. Sathish,Adv.

Ms. Bina Madhavan,Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.

(NEELAM GULATI)

COURT MASTER

(TAPAN KUMAR CHAKRABORTY)

COURT MASTER

(Signed order is placed on the file)