Deputy Commissioner Sales Tax (Law) vs Thekkethala Kochuvaroo Sons

K.S. Paripoornam, J.—The Revenue is the Petitioner herein. The Respondent/dealer is an Assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. We are concerned with the assessment year 1983-84. In this revision, we are concerned only with the question as to whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the Assessee was entitled to deduction of the amount representing sales tax from the total turnover. The assessing authority as well as the first appellate authority held, that under Rule 9(1) of the K.G.S.T. Rules, all amounts of sales tax collected by the dealer, if shown separately in the bills, are entitled to be deducted from the total turnover. The case of the Revenue was that sales tax was not separately shown in the bills entitling the Assessee for deduction under Rule 9(1) of the K.G.S.T. Rules. The Appellate Tribunal referred to Rule 9(1) of the K.G.S.T. Rules and other relevant statutory provisions and also referred to the fact that in the sale memos the Assessee has printed that the value of the goods is inclusive of sales tax and additional sales tax. It was held that the Assessee was entitled to deduction of the amounts of sales tax and additional sales tax collected by the Assessee and shown separately in the sales extract register in determining the taxable turnover. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, dated 18th June 1991, the Revenue has come up in revision.

We heard counsel for the Revenue, Sr. Government Pleader Mr. Karunakaran Nambiar. The Assessee''s counsel produced before us the original copies of the various said memos (bills) issued by the Assessee to various customers. All of them have got a foot note to the following effect:

Value in the taxable column are inclusive of sales tax and additional sales tax.

It is common ground that the sale memos (bills) pointedly specified that the amount collected under the bill included sales tax and additional sales tax, as the case may be. It is true that the Assessee did not separately indicate in the sale bills the sales tax and additional sales tax collected by them. But the bills pointed out that the total amount collected included sales tax and additional sales tax. The sales tax and additional sales tax were shown separately in the sales extract maintained by the Assessee regularly in the ordinary course of business. The Appellate Tribunal adverted to the said plea in paragraph 3 of its order and further stated that the sale memos (bills) contained a note that the value in the taxable column are inclusive of sales tax and additional sales tax and the Assessee has shown separately the sales tax and additional sales tax collected on the taxable items in the sales extract register maintained by them. In the view of the Appellate Tribunal, there is clear evidence to show that the Assessee has collected sales tax and additional sales tax and so they are entitled to deduction there of under Rule 9(1) of the K.G.S.T. Rules in determining the taxable turnover.

We are of the view that the decision of the Appellate Tribunal is in accord with an earlier Bench decision of this Court rendered in T.R.C. No. 38 of 1991, dated 12th April 1991. Substantially, on identical facts, a Bench of this Court held thus, in paragraph 3 of the judgment:

...The Appellate Tribunal has particularly noticed that in the sale bill it is specifically noted that the amount shown in the bill is ''including sales tax''. The accounts also reflect that a proper bifurcation of sale price and sales tax has been made. It is, therefore, clear that what was collected as per the bills by the dealer represented not merely the price of the goods, but also the tax payable on the sale and the quantum of tax payable is clearly discernible * * * * * * We are of the view that the decision of the Appellate Tribunal, holding that the Assessee/dealer is entitled to deduction of sales tax collected, does not merit interference in revision.

The reasoning and conclusion in the said Tax Revision Case are squarely applicable herein also. Following the said decision, we hold that the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the Assessee is entitled to the deduction of sales tax and additional sales tax under Rule 9(1) of the K.G.S.T. Rules in determining the taxable turnover.

The order passed by the Appellate Tribunal does not merit interference in revision. We dismiss the revision in limine.