Kerala High Court
Mini Jayalal vs State Of Kerala on 13 January, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:2070
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 23RD POUSHA, 1946
OT.REV NO. 1 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2023 IN TA(VAT) NO.77 OF 2021 OF THE
KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX/AGRL. INCOME TAX & SALES TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, ADDL. BENCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:
MINI JAYALAL
AGED 50 YEARS
WIFE OF JAYALAL, RESIDING AT THIRUVONAM HOUSE, SANTHI
NAGAR-297A, AYATHIL.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PROPRIETRESS, MEENU'S CASHEW PRODUCTS, UMAYANALLUR,
KOLLAM DISTRICT. PIN CODE: 691020,
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)
SRI.SABU C.J
SRI.RAHUL A.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS AND
SERVICE TAXES, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695002
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V K SHAMSUDHEEN
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.01.2025, ALONG WITH OT.REV.2/2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:2070
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 23RD POUSHA, 1946
OT.REV NO. 2 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2023 IN TA(VAT) NO.76 OF 2021 OF THE
KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX/AGRL. INCOME TAX & SALES TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, ADDL. BENCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:
MINI JAYALAL
AGED 50 YEARS
WIFE OF JAYALAL, RESIDING AT THIRUVONAM HOUSE, SANTHI
NAGAR-297A, AYATHIL.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PROPRIETRESS, M/S. MEENU'S CASHEW PRODUCTS,
UMAYANALLUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. PIN CODE: 691020,
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)
SRI.SABU C.J
SRI.RAHUL A.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS AND
SERVICE TAXES, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695002
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V K SHAMSUDHEEN
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.01.2025, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.1/2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:2070
ORDER
Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
These OT. Revision petitions impugn a common order dated
15.11.2023 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench,
Thiruvananthapuram in TA(VAT) Nos.76 and 77 of 2021.
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of these OT. Revision
petitions are as follows:
The revision petitioner is a dealer on the rolls of the Assistant
Commissioner, Kundara. The assessment of the petitioner under the CST Act
for the years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, respectively were completed by
allowing the concessional rate of tax in relation to some portion of the turnover
and disallowing the concessional rate in respect of the turnover pertaining to
transactions that were not supported by valid C-Forms.
3. Against the assessment order, the petitioner filed appeals before
the First Appellate Authority, who dismissed the appeals by finding that the
petitioner had failed to produce the necessary C Forms, and to comply with the
directions issued by the High Court in the Writ Petitions filed by the petitioner.
It was aggrieved by the dismissal of the First Appeals that the petitioner
approached the Tribunal through the appeals aforementioned.
4. The Tribunal, on a consideration of the appeals, found as follows in
paragraphs 9 and 10 of the impugned order:
"9. Appellant contends that a broker was there
between the firm and purchasing dealers and the broker had
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:2070
ulterior intentions to deceive and cheat the firm of the
appellant. Appellant had filed a crime case against the broker
before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court and this has
prevented appellant from filing C forms. We have noticed that
appellant had already represented these issues before the
Hon'ble High Court and obtained a favourable judgment. The
order of the Court was to file a request to the assessing
authority with an indemnity bond within two weeks of receipt
of a copy of the judgment. Appellant assessee failed to comply
this direction of the Court. In the present appeal before this
Tribunal, the plea of the appellant is to allow them to file the
indemnity bond now. At the time of hearing also, no C forms
are available with the appellant for the balance turnover.
10. As there was specific direction from the Hon'ble
High Court to comply the directions within two weeks, the
Tribunal cannot allow more time or give an extension of time. It
is surprising that, this appeal is filed before this Tribunal to get
such a relief by extending the time allowed by the Hon'ble High
Court. Moreover, appellant is not able to settle the so called
issue with the purchasers or agent and to produce C forms for
any amount. Therefore, the orders of authorities below are to
be upheld and the appeals are liable to be dismissed. "
5. We have heard Sri.Rahul A, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
and Sri.V.K.Shamsudheen, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the
respondent.
6. On a consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the view that
the impugned order of the Tribunal does not require any interference. As can
be seen from the findings of the First Appellate Tribunal in the impugned
order, the petitioner, despite having been given an opportunity to produce the
C-Form or to furnish an indemnity bond within two weeks of receipt of the copy
of the judgment of the High Court, failed to comply with the said direction
before the Appellate Authority. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner did
not seek any extension of time from this Court for complying with the
directions in the judgment aforementioned. Under the said circumstances, and
since no valid C-Forms were produced before the Appellate Tribunal, the view
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:2070
taken by the Appellate Tribunal cannot be said to be illegal or unsustainable.
The OT. Revision petitions, therefore, fail and are accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
mns
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:2070
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure I A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27-08-
2020 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY FOR
THE YEAR 2015-2016
Annexure II A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16-04-2021 ISSUED
BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOLLAM
Annexure III A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 02-04-2024
ENTERED INTO BY THE PETITIONER WITH
SRI.KISHORE KUMAR AND OTHERS
Annexure IV A LIST OF THE 'C' FORMS HANDED OVER BY
SRI.KISHORE KUMAR, TOGETHER WITH COPIES OF
THE 'C' FORMS
Annexure V TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 15-11-
2023 OF THE HON'BLE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN
OT.REV NOs. 1&2 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:2070
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure I A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 09-11-
2020 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY FOR
THE YEAR 2016-2017
Annexure II A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17-04-2021 ISSUED
BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOLLAM
Annexure III A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 02-04-2024
ENTERED INTO BY THE PETITIONER WITH
SRI.KISHORE KUMAR AND OTHERS
Annexure IV A LIST OF THE 'C' FORMS HANDED OVER BY SRI.
KISHORE KUMAR, TOGETHER WITH COPIES OF THE
'C' FORMS
Annexure V A COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 15-11-2023
OF THE HON'BLE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL
