Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs M/S.Bell Electronics on 29 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 9TH MAGHA, 1942
OT.Rev.No.47 OF 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN TAVAT 16/2014 DATED 31-08-2015 OF
S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,KZD.
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),
COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.
SR GP MOHAMMED RAFIQ FOR THE APPELLANT
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S.BELL ELECTRONICS
OYITTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 001.
OTHER PRESENT:
SR GP MOHAMMED RAFIQ FOR THE APPELLANT
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
29.01.2021, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.52/2016, OT.Rev.54/2016, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
-2-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 9TH MAGHA, 1942
OT.Rev.No.52 OF 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN TAVAT 17/2014 OF
S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,KZD.
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),
COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.
SR GP MOHAMMED RAFIQ FOR THE APPELLANT
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S. BELL ELECTRONICS
OYITTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 001.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
29.01.2021, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.47/2016, OT.Rev.54/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
-3-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 9TH MAGHA, 1942
OT.Rev.No.54 OF 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN TA 18/2014 DATED 31-08-2015 OF
S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,KZD.
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW)
COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM
SR GP MOHAMMED RAFIQ FOR THE APPELLANT
RESPONDENT/S:
M/S BELL ELECTRONICS
OYITTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 001
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
29.01.2021, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.47/2016, OT.Rev.52/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
-4-
ORDER
[ OT.Rev.47/2016, OT.Rev.52/2016, OT.Rev.54/2016 ]
Dated this the 29th day of January 2021
S.V.Bhatti, J.
Department is the petitioner in these three revisions filed
under Section 63 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 against
the common order dated 31.08.2015. The subject matter of the
litigation is in respect of Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12 and
2012-13. The Commercial Tax Officer, 2 nd circle, Commercial Taxes,
Kozhikode through order dated 10.10.2012 enhanced the turnover of
respondent/assessee, and raised tax demand and the details are
stated thus:
Assessment Year Disputed Turnover Tax due on disputed
turnover
2010-11 Rs.2,21,503/- Rs.25,577/-
2011-12 Rs.2,37,045/- Rs.25,222/-
2012-13 Rs.62,052/- Rs.24,852/-
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
The assessee/respondent filed appeal and the appeal was dismissed
through Annexure B dated 20.05.2014. The assessee filed TA (VAT)
Nos.16, 17 & 18/2014 before the Tribunal. The appeals were
allowed. Hence, the revisions at the instance of the Department.
2. Senior Government Pleader Mohammed Rafiq argues
that the Tribunal has substantially re-appreciated the issues in a
prejudicial manner to the interest of Revenue, and no disagreement
is noted on fundamental reasons stated by the Assessing Officer or
the Appellate Authority. But, by appreciating the issue altogether in
a new way, allowed the appeals filed by the assessee. The Tribunal,
at best, could have remanded the case without adversely affecting
the interest of Revenue and, with the order under revision the
suppressed turnover goes unaccounted for, without payment of tax.
3. We have perused the record and taken note of the
submissions canvassed by Senior Government Pleader Mohammed
Rafiq. The contentions, in our considered view, need not be taken
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
up independently, for, it would suffice if we refer to the reasons
which weighed the Tribunal for allowing the appeals filed by the
assessee. The first reason recorded by the Tribunal is that the
Assessing Authority, on an erroneous view of the matter, on the
basis of pricing methodology adopted by the assessee, found that
the actual sales price to the end customer was not reflected from
the invoices and accounts. These observations are without
undervaluation or commodity evaluation. What is normally
required for accepting undervaluation or suppression of sales is not
stated. Fixation of gross profit at 15% is illegal, erroneous and
unavailable to the nature of business carried on by
assessee/respondent, who deals with electronic goods. The
suppression of sale is based on assumptions, not by appreciating
explanation offered by the assessee and also the Articles which were
dealt with by the assessee in the invoices were pricing methodology
and methodology for dealers and end customers appear to be same
and similar. The applicability of Section 24 to the case on hand is
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
considered and tenable findings are recorded against the
Department. What is under challenge before this Court is the
reasons or the conclusions in order in Annexure C dated 31.08.2015.
The questions framed or the submissions made by the Senior
Government Pleader are not convincing, warranting further
examination by us.
4. We are convinced the findings recorded by the Tribunal
are just and also warranting in the circumstances of the case. We
see no reason to interdict the order of the Tribunal.
The revisions fail. Accordingly, dismissed. No order as to
costs.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTI
JUDGE
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
jjj
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 47/2016
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE
YEAR 2010-11 DATED 10.10.2012 PASSED BY THE
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IInd CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL
TAXES, KOZHIKODE.
ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES,
ERNAKULAM DATED 20.05.2014.
ANNEXURE C A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA
VALUE ADDED TAX/AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND
SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH,
KOZHIKODE IN TA(VAT)Nos.16/14 TO 18/14.
ANNEXURE C(A) A TRUE COPY OF ANNEXURE C
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 52/2016
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE
YEAR 2011-12 DATED 10.10.2012 PASSED BY THE
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IInd CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL
TAXES, KOZHIKODE.
ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES,
ERNAKULAM DATED 20.05.2014.
ANNEXURE C A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA VALUE
ADDED TAX/AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND SALES
TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH,
KOZHIKODE IN TA(VAT)Nos.16/14 TO 18/14.
O.T.Rev. Nos. 47,52,54/2016
APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 54/2016
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE
YEAR 2012-13 DATED 10.10.2012 PASSED BY THE
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IInd CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL
TAXES, KOZHIKODE.
ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES,
ERNAKULAM DATED 20.05.2014.
ANNEXURE C A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA VALUE
ADDED TAX/AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND SALES
TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH,
KOZHIKODE IN TA(VAT)Nos.16/14 TO 18/14.
