TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the review petition was maintainable under the statutory review provision governing revisions under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963; (ii) whether the contention that ammonia paper was a paper product could be entertained in review when that aspect had not been shown to have been decided by the appellate tribunal.
Issue (i): whether the review petition was maintainable under the statutory review provision governing revisions under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963
Analysis: The statutory scheme permitted review only in the manner and on the grounds specified in section 41(7) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The petition was not presented under that provision, was not filed in the prescribed manner, and did not satisfy the statutory conditions for review. A review application under the general provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 could not override the specific limitations imposed by the taxing statute.
Conclusion: The review petition was not maintainable and this issue was decided against the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether the contention that ammonia paper was a paper product could be entertained in review when that aspect had not been shown to have been decided by the appellate tribunal
Analysis: The revisional jurisdiction under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 extended only to questions of law actually decided erroneously or questions of law that were shown to have been omitted for decision by the tribunal. The record showed that the tribunal had decided only whether ammonia paper answered the description of "paper" in entry 97 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. There was no material to establish that the alternative plea that it was a paper product had been pressed before the tribunal or that the tribunal had failed to decide it. In the absence of such material, the issue could not be reopened in review.
Conclusion: The paper-product contention could not be entertained in review and this issue was decided against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The review petition failed both on maintainability and on merits, and the correction sought in the earlier judgment was confined to a clerical clarification.
Ratio Decidendi: A review under the special sales tax revisional scheme is confined to the statutory grounds expressly provided, and a contention not shown to have been decided by the tribunal or shown to have been pressed before it cannot be introduced for the first time in review.
TaxTMI 
