Sales tax reference rulings are not final orders under Article 133 when they only declare law without conclusively determining rights.

A High Court judgment delivered on a sales tax reference under section 24(5) of the Cochin Sales Tax Act was treated as only an advisory declaration of law, because the revenue authority retained the duty to dispose of the case and determine the parties' rights. Applying the same principle used for analogous reference provisions, the Court held that such a pronouncement does not amount to a judgment, decree or final order within Article 133 of the Constitution, as it lacks conclusive effect on the merits of the dispute. The certificate petition therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a judgment delivered by the High Court on a sales tax reference under section 24(5) of the Cochin Sales Tax Act is a judgment, decree or final order within Article 133 of the Constitution and whether it is a judgment in a civil proceeding.

Analysis: The reference procedure required the High Court only to decide the question of law and send its judgment to the sales tax authority, which then had to dispose of the case in accordance with that opinion. Such a pronouncement did not itself finally determine or affect the rights of the parties; the operative decision remained with the revenue authority. The same principle had been applied to analogous reference provisions, including section 66(5) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the expression in Article 133 was treated as requiring a final adjudication on rights, not merely an advisory determination of law.

Conclusion: The judgment under section 24(5) of the Cochin Sales Tax Act is not a judgment, decree or final order within Article 133 of the Constitution, and the certificate petition fails.

Ratio Decidendi: A High Court decision rendered on a statutory reference that merely declares the law for the benefit of the revenue authority, without itself conclusively determining the parties' rights, is not a final judgment or final order for purposes of Article 133.

---