Sales return deduction for expired medicines rejected where statutory return period was not met and completed sales were not unfructified.

Deduction for sales return of medicines returned after expiry of shelf-life was unavailable under rule 9(b)(i) because the statutory benefit applied only where goods were returned within three months of sale, and the record did not show compliance with that limit. The court also held that later collection and destruction of expired medicines did not convert completed manufacturer-to-distributor and distributor-to-retailer sales into unfructified sales, as credit notes only adjusted the commercial loss and did not undo the sales. The disallowance of the sales return claim was therefore sustained against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether sales return in respect of medicines returned after expiry of shelf-life was deductible under rule 9(b)(i) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules; (ii) whether such transactions could be treated as unfructified sales so as to entitle the assessee to refund or adjustment of tax.

Issue (i): whether sales return in respect of medicines returned after expiry of shelf-life was deductible under rule 9(b)(i) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules

Analysis: The statutory deduction was available only where goods were returned within three months from the date of sale. On the admitted marketing pattern for medicines, shelf-life expired goods would ordinarily be returned well after the sale and not within the prescribed period. The record also did not show that the claimed returns satisfied the time-limit fixed by the rule. The rules contained no separate provision permitting refund or adjustment for medicines that lost potency after sale and were later collected and destroyed.

Conclusion: The claim for deduction was not allowable and the rejection by the assessing authority and the Tribunal was upheld, against the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether such transactions could be treated as unfructified sales so as to entitle the assessee to refund or adjustment of tax

Analysis: The sales had already taken place from the manufacturer to the distributor and thereafter to the retail dealer. The later collection of expired medicines did not undo the completed sales, and the return mechanism through credit notes only adjusted the commercial loss. The transactions therefore could not be characterized as sales that had never fructified.

Conclusion: The plea of unfructified sales was rejected, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The connected revision cases were decided against the assessee and the disallowance of the sales return claim was sustained.

---