2015 (2) TMI 91 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Exemption from payment of tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act - Notification withdrawing exemption granted by previous Notification - Held that - petitioner being a packaged drinking water unit is thus undoubtedly entitled to the exemption granted under S.R.O. No. 731/2004. This is the purport and import of exhibit judgement 2008 (7) TMI 946 - KERALA HIGH COURT annulling S.R.O. No. 377/2005 which has to be given full effect in letter and spirit. It is reported that order of assessment for the year 2000-01 stands remitted to the first respondent under exhibit P5 appellate order. Nothing prohibits the first respondent from taking into consideration the effect of SRO No. 731/ 2004 by virtue of judgement 2008 (7) TMI 946 - KERALA HIGH COURT - Decided in favour of Assesse.

Summary

Issues:
1. Exemption from payment of tax for packaged drinking water units under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act.
2. Withdrawal of S.R.O. No. 731/2004 and subsequent legal implications.
3. Validity and effect of exhibit P6 judgment annulling S.R.O. No. 377/2005.
4. Direction to the first respondent to give effect to exhibit P6 judgment for assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02.
5. Petitioner's submissions and representations regarding the exemption.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a packaged drinking water unit, was granted exemption from tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act for a specific period. However, a court ruling determined that units engaged in packaged drinking water were not eligible for exemption due to the absence of a manufacturing process. Subsequently, the Government issued S.R.O. No. 731/2004, granting exemption for a different period. This S.R.O. was later withdrawn by S.R.O. No. 377/2005, leading to a legal challenge through a writ petition, resulting in exhibit P6 judgment. The court quashed S.R.O. No. 377/2005, effectively reinstating the exemption granted under S.R.O. No. 731/2004 for the petitioner.

The court emphasized that the petitioner was unequivocally entitled to the exemption provided under S.R.O. No. 731/2004 as per the exhibit P6 judgment, which needed to be fully enforced. The judgment directed the first respondent to implement the exhibit P6 judgment for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02. Specifically, the court annulled an assessment order for 2001-02 to determine the liability considering the exemption. The petitioner's continuous representations and compliance with the exhibit P6 judgment were highlighted, indicating no delay or negligence on their part.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition, instructing the first respondent to take necessary actions within two months based on the exhibit P6 judgment. The judgment reaffirmed the petitioner's right to the exemption under S.R.O. No. 731/2004 and emphasized the importance of adhering to the legal decisions and representations made in this regard.