Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala Represented By ... vs Hotel Meriya on 15 February, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945
RP NO. 163 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 30.11.2023 IN WP(C)
42933/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS IN WRIT PETITION:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHEIF
SECRETARY(TAXES)
AGED 39 YEARS
ROOM NO 396,FIRST FLOOR,NEAR SOUTH CONFERENCE
HALL,MAIN BLOCK,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
GPO, PIN - 695001
2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
SPECIAL CIRCLE 1,STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
DEPARTMENT,GST COMPLEX, JAWAHAR NAGAR, ERANHIPALAM
P O , KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673006
3 COMMISSIONER
KERALA STATE GST DEPARTMENT,9TH FLOOR,TAX
TOWER,KILLIPPALAM,KARAMANA P O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695002
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
A.MUHAMMED RAFIQ
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN WRIT PETITION:
HOTEL MERIYA
MAVOOR ROAD,KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER -K T JOSEPH, PIN - 673661
BY ADV.
SRI. K. I. MAYANKUTTY MATHER
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RP No.163 of 2024
2
ORDER
Dated this the 15th day of February, 2024
Heard Mr. A. Muhammed Rafiq, learned Special
Government Pleader for the review petitioners and Mr.
Mayankutty Mather for the respondents.
2. This review petition has been filed seeking review
of the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2023 passed in
the batch of writ petitions including W.P.(C) No. 42933 of
2022.
3. This Court after hearing the learned Counsel
appearing for the parties, vide the final Judgment and
Order under review, held that in cases where the return
were filed on or before 31.03.2022 and turnover tax was
cleared on or before 30.04.2022 by the FL3 licensees, for
the period from 22.05.2020 to 21.12.2020 and from
15.06.2021 to 25.09.2021 for the financial years 2020-21
and 2021-22, they would not be liable to pay interest for
delayed filing of the returns and payment of turnover tax
@ 5% on their parcel sales authorised by the Government
during the Covid lock down period. This Court considered
all the documents which were placed on record and the
submissions of both sides.
4. Mr. A. Muhammed Rafiq, learned Special
Government Pleader, however submits that there has
occurred an error apparent on the face of the record
which occassioned the review petitioners to seek review
of the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2023 passed by
this Court. He further submits that the reduction of tax
from 10% to 5% was not limited only in respect of the
sale effected by the Bar attached Hotels during the Covid
lock down period but, the exemption was granted for the
period from 2014-15 to 2015-16 as per the Cabinet Note
placed on record as Annexure (A) by which the decision
was taken to amend Section 7A of the Kerala General
Sales Tax Act, 1963. The exemption from payment of tax
up to 5% by the Bar attached Hotels on their parcel sales,
would not mean that they were not required to pay the
tax @ 10%, but they could have claimed refund of the 5%
tax and, therefore, they were liable to pay the interest on
delayed payment of turnover tax. He further submits that
the proposal to reduce the tax from 10% to 5% in the
cabinet decision has to be considered in that respect. Mr.
A. Muhammed Rafiq has also placed reliance on
Annexure (B) of the review petition which is the decision
of the Cabinet. Relevant portion of Annexure (B) reads as
under;
"Decision : Proposal (1) of Note accepted.
(2) the suggestion in the note was considered. It has
been decided to extend the time for filing of the
returns till March 31, 2022 and till April 30, 2022 for
payment of arrears."
5. On the other hand, Mr. K. I. Mayankutty Mather,
learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submits
that the Annexure (A) document placed on record i.e. the
note put up before the Cabinet for consideration
regarding the reduction of turnover tax for the period
during lock down from 22.05.2020 to 21.12.2020 and
from 15.06.2021 to 25.09.2021 is specific that the Bar
attached Hotels and shops were required to pay 5% of
the turnover tax as is applicable in respect of the retail
outlets run by the Beverages Corporation. In pursuance
to the said cabinet note, the cabinet has taken the
decision and, thereafter, Exhibit P-2 was issued notifying
the rate of turnover tax. 5.1. Once the notification was
issued, the respondents herein have remitted the tax, as
per the time extended for filing the return and remittance
of tax. This Court has considered every aspect of the
matter, the submissions and documents placed on record.
There is no error apparent on the face of the record
which requires this Court to review its well considered
Judgment dated 30.11.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 42933 of 2022
and connected matters.
6. I have considered the submissions. Review
jurisdiction is to be exercised in a very limited manner
where there an is error apparent on the face of the
record. This Court has considered each and every
document and the submissions while rendering the
Judgment dated 30.11.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 42933 of 2022
and connected matters. Furthermore, these documents
were not part of the pleadings. Review does not mean
rehearing or appeal. There has to be finality to a
litigation. This Court, based on the submissions,
documents and evidences, has rendered the Judgment
sought to be reviewed. Therefore, I find no error
apparent on the face of the record which warrants this
Court to reconsider this Judgment under review. There is
no substance in this review petition and the same is
hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
JUDGE
AP
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE PLACED BEFORE THE
COUNCIL OF MINISTERS IN RESPECT OF FILE
NO. 201/B3/201/TD
Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
CABINET MEETING OF MINISTERS,HELD ON 23-
02-2022 ALONG WITH TRANSLATION OF
RELEVANT PORTION IN ENGLISH
