2018 (10) TMI 516

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and 345/2008 are from the assessment orders for the year 1998-99; one from the original assessment and the other from the order in a rectification application filed by the State before the Tribunal. S.T.Rev.Nos.5/2007 and 7/2007 are from the assessments for the years 2000-01 and 2001-02. The question of law raised in these revisions is as to whether the respondent-Procter and Gamble Home Products Limited (PGHPL) is liable to tax under Section 5(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 ('KGST Act' for short) for the sale of products under the brand name 'Procter and Gamble'. The Tribunal held that the PGHPL and manufacturer, Procter and Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Limited (PGHHCL), who sold to PGHPL, are both permitted to use ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er the amnesty scheme and hence approached this Court and obtained a direction to so consider. Aggrieved with set-off not being permitted of the amounts paid in compliance with the interim orders at the various stages of the statutory scheme as also that of the tax paid by the manufacturer, the assessee filed a writ petition which is also posted along with the revisions. It is also alleged that the years 2002-03 and 2003-04 were not considered for amnesty now, though included in the earlier order passed. The writ petition is filed seeking an appropriate revision of the order passed under the amnesty scheme produced as Ext.P7. 4. The learned Senior Government Pleader points out that as far as the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the years 2002-03 and 2003-04, amnesty scheme has been applied and order passed as per Ext.P4. Ext.P7 is the order with respect to the years 1998-99 to 2001-02. The claim of the assessee is to give adjustments insofar as the payments made by the assessee pending litigation as also the tax paid by PGHHCL for the sale to the assessee. 7. To understand the different components claimed adjustment by the assessee, one has to look at Ext.P1 application under the amnesty scheme filed by the petitioner-assessee. In the years 1998-99 to 2002-03, there is a total amount of Rs. 3,28,34,036.09 paid by PGHHCL, the manufacturer, as tax with respect to the sale made to the assessee. The same has to be considered for deduction under Rule 32(13B) of th....