Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court Upholds Tax Decision on Rubber Industry Exemption

        PS. Sadasivan Versus State of Kerala

        PS. Sadasivan Versus State of Kerala - [2008] 13 VST 481 (Ker) Issues Involved:
        1. Legality of the order passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal rejecting the claim for reduced rate of tax on inter-State sales.
        2. Interpretation of the exemption/reduction in tax rate under G.O. (Ms) No. 124/88/ID dated August 31, 1988.
        3. Applicability of Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

        Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

        1. Legality of the Order Passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal:
        The petitioner challenged the legality of the order passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, which rejected the claim for a reduced rate of tax on inter-State sales as provided under Section 8(2A) of the CST Act. The Tribunal had upheld the decision of the assessing authority and the first appellate authority, which had both rejected the petitioner's claim for reduced tax rates on the grounds that the exemption granted under the Government Order was not a general exemption but was subject to specific conditions.

        2. Interpretation of the Exemption/Reduction in Tax Rate under G.O. (Ms) No. 124/88/ID dated August 31, 1988:
        The petitioner, a small-scale industrial unit engaged in the manufacture and sale of tread rubber, argued that the Government Order dated August 31, 1988, provided a general reduction in the rate of tax on the sales turnover of rubber goods to three percent. The petitioner contended that this reduction was unconditional and not restricted to specific circumstances or stages, and therefore should be considered a general reduction under Section 8(2A) of the CST Act. However, the assessing authority and the Tribunal found that the Government Order was intended to encourage the setting up of rubber industries in Kerala and provided specific concessions and incentives to new rubber industries, such as exemption from purchase tax on rubber used in new industries, additional capital subsidy, and reduced sales tax on finished rubber goods produced in Kerala. The Tribunal concluded that the reduction in tax rate was not a general reduction but was conditional and specific to new rubber industries in Kerala.

        3. Applicability of Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956:
        The core issue was whether the exemption/reduction in tax rate under the Government Order qualified as a general exemption under Section 8(2A) of the CST Act. Section 8(2A) provides that the tax payable under the CST Act shall be nil or calculated at a lower rate if the sale or purchase of goods is exempt from tax generally under the State sales tax law. The Explanation to Section 8(2A) clarifies that an exemption is not considered general if it applies only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions. The court referred to the Supreme Court's decisions in Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jammu and Kashmir v. Pine Chemicals Ltd. and State of Uttar Pradesh v. Hindustan Safety Glass Works (P.) Ltd., which emphasized that a general exemption means that goods are totally exempt from tax without any conditions or specified circumstances. In the present case, the court found that the Government Order was not a general exemption as it provided specific concessions to new rubber industries and was not applicable to all sales of rubber goods generally. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of reduced tax rates under Section 8(2A) of the CST Act.

        Conclusion:
        The court upheld the decisions of the assessing authority and the Tribunal, concluding that the Government Order did not provide a general exemption from tax but was conditional and specific to new rubber industries in Kerala. Consequently, the petitioner was not entitled to a reduced rate of tax on inter-State sales under Section 8(2A) of the CST Act. The sales tax revision petitions were rejected, and the questions of law framed were answered against the petitioner.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found