OT.Rev.No.110 of 2017 & Connected Cases (State of Kerala v. Lakshya Agencies; Total Distributors; Chakkunni & Co.; S.M. Foods Beemanady)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO. 184/2016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD DATED 31.10.2016** ## **REVISION PETITIONER:(RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE)** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW) COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E. UNNIKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT:(APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE)** **SRI.KIRAN KUMAR M/S. LAKSHYA AGENCIES, KASARAGOD, PIN-671121.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **2** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941 OT.Rev.No.117 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN T.A (VAT) NO. 183/2016 DATED 31-10-2016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD DATED 31.10.2016** ## **REVISION PETITIONER:- (RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE)** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** **RESPONDENT:- (APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE)** **SRI.KIRAN KUMAR M/S.LAKSHYA AGENCIES, KASARAGOD, PIN-671121.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **3** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** **OT.Rev.No.120 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO. 231/2016 DATED 24-112016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD** ## **REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:** **M/S. TOTAL DISTRIBUTORS KADANNAPPALLY, KANNUR, PIN-670501.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **4** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** **OT.Rev.No.124 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO. 232/2016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD DATED 24.11.2016** ## **REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNNIKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:** **M/S. TOTAL DISTRIBUTORS KADANNAPPALLY, KANNUR, PIN-670501** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **5** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** ## **OT.Rev.No.141 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO. 317/2016 DATED 31-12-2016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD** ## **REVISION PETITIONER:-(RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE)** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT:- (APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE)** **M/S. CHAKKUNNI & CO. KEVIN ARCADE, M.P.ROAD, CALICUT, PIN-673001.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **6** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941 OT.Rev.No.142 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO. 318/2016 DATED 31-12-2016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD** ## **REVISION PETITIONER:- (RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE)** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** **RESPONDENT:- (APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE)** **M/S.CHAKKUNNI & CO. KEVIN ARCADE, M.P.ROAD, CALICUT.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **7** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** **OT.Rev.No.188 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO.379/2016 DATED 15-02-2017 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD** ## **REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(LAW)COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:** **M/S.S.M.FOODS BEEMANADY 671 314** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **8** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** **OT.Rev.No.189 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN T.A.(VAT) NO.381/2016 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD DATED 15.02.2017.** ## **REVISION PETITIONER:- (RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE)** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** **RESPONDENT:- (APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE)** **M/S. S.M.FOODS BEEMANADY, PIN-671314.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.190/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **9** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** ## **OT.Rev.No.190 OF 2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA(VAT) NO. 380/2016 DATED 15-02-2017 OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDITIONAL BENCH,PKD** ## **REVISION PETITIONER:- (RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE)** **THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW),COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.** **BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.E UNNIKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT:- (APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE)** **M/S. S.M. FOODS OPP. TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, BEEMANADY, PIN-671314, KASARAGOD.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH** **THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, ALONG WITH OT.Rev.110/2017, OT.Rev.117/2017, OT.Rev.120/2017, OT.Rev.124/2017, OT.Rev.141/2017, OT.Rev.142/2017, OT.Rev.188/2017, OT.Rev.189/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **10** ## **C.K. ABDUL REHIM & R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.** ## **----------------------------------------------O.T (Rev) Nos.110,117,120,124,141,142,188, 189 & 190 of 2017** **---------------------------------------------------** _Dated this the 21[st] day of August, 2019_ ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Abdul Rehim,J** In all these revision petitions filed by the State, challenge is against orders of the Kerala Value Added Tax Additional Appellate Tribunal, Palakkad, to the extent of the direction issued for making refund of excess tax paid by the respondent/assessee. The issue involved was regarding the rate of tax applicable with respect to the products dealt with the assessee namely; “Ujala Stiff” and “Ujala Shine”. The tribunal found that, the Honourable Supreme Court had already settled the issue by holding that the rate of tax applicable is 4%, as coming under entry 118(5) of list A to III schedule of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act). Therefore the direction as mentioned above was issued. 2. Learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) had pointed out that, the direction for refund issued by the tribunal would go against the stand adopted by the Honourable Supreme Court in the **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **11** decision in **M.P. Agencies v. State of Kerala [2015 (79) VST 337 (SC)].** It is pointed out that, the Honourable Apex Court had specifically mentioned therein that, if the assessee had paid the amount of VAT to the State Government, they will not be entitled to get any refund. It is argued that the tribunal had omitted to consider the direction issued in this regard by the apex court and the refund ordered with respect to the excess tax collected and paid to the Government, is illegal. 3. Sri. Premjith Nagendran appearing for the respondent/assessee had pointed out that, the tax with respect to the product was assessed at different sale points, such as at the hands of the, manufacturer, super-stockist, stockist, dealer etc. In all the stages, the tax was not collected from the customers, but was compelled to be paid because of the disputed claim relating to the entry, based on classification of the products. It is pointed out that, the direction of the Honourable Supreme Court is specific that the appellant/assessee in that case was declared as not entitled for refund of the tax paid to the Government. But it is not a judgment in rem, is the contention of the respondent. The direction can be sustained only if the tax paid was the amount of tax collected from the customers and which he is not entitled to retain, is the **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **12** submission. According to counsel for the assessee, the excess tax remitted to the Government is liable to be refunded, because the tax amount was not collected from the customers and the transactions reflected in the Books of Accounts would reveal it. It is also pointed out that the department has not allowed any credit of input tax with respect to the excess amount remitted. 4. We take note of the fact that the direction issued by the Honourable Supreme Court in **M.P. Agencies case** (supra) is specific that; ” _if any assessee/appellant has paid the amount of VAT to the State Government, they will not be entitled to get any refund of the said amount”_ . Therefore it cannot be disputed that the direction is binding only with respect to the parties involved in the said case. It is general rule of law in the taxation field and based on specific provisions contained in the physical statutes, that the tax collected and paid to the Government cannot be directed to be refunded. 5. Law remaining settled through various decisions indicate that, if the amount deposited by the dealer is from its own funds, without passing the burden to the customers, then it does not attract principle of unjust enrichment. On the contrary, if it is the amount collected from the customers, it would become an unjust enrichment **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **13** to the dealer, in which case, the Government is entitled to forfeit the same, as provided under Section 72 of the KVAT Act. 6. But, the learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) submitted that, in the case of **M.P. Agencies** ( _supra_ ), the assesses therein had filed interim applications before the apex court seeking clarification, by pointing out that the excess amount was deposited under compulsion and those are not amounts collected from the customers. Therefore, such amounts need to be refunded was the claim. But the prayer was rejected and the interim applications were dismissed through an order passed by the apex court on 18.01.2016. It is argued that the above context would indicate that the apex court was not inclined to accept the contention raised by the assessees therein, with respect to refund of the excess tax paid. Hence, it may not be justifiable on the part of this court to hold that the amount paid in excess will be liable to be refunded in case such amounts were not collected from the customers. 7. As already observed, the specific wordings contained in the judgment would indicate that, the refund was not allowed only in the case of the appellants before the apex court. It is true that those appellants sought for clarification by contending that the amount of excess tax deposited are not amounts collected from the customers. **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **14** Learned Special Government Pleader had made available a copy of the order passed by the apex court, dismissing the clarification petitions. The said order is not an elaborate order mentioning any reason for the rejection. So we cannot presume that the apex court had decided the issue on merits or settled any principle of law on the point. We are of the opinion that, as the question of law remaining settled as on, there arose no unjust enrichment to the respondents/assessees, unless the excess amount of tax was actually collected by them from the customers. For making a verification on the question as to whether the excess amount paid/deposited is the amount paid from the own funds of the assessees or whether those amounts were collected from the customers, a detailed probe into the Books of Accounts of each of the assessees, kept as part of their regular transaction of business at the relevant time, is necessary. Therefore we think it only appropriate to relegate the matter for a decision of the assessing officer, to be made after verification of the relevant documents. We make it clear that, the respondents/assessees will be entitled for refund of the excess amount deposited/paid, if there is evidence to the effect that such amounts are not collected from the customers or if the same was not recouped by their principles or the assessees **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **15** have not passed the liability to the customers. 8. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the above revision petitions are hereby allowed and the impugned orders passed by the tribunal are hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the assessing authority for taking fresh decision on the question of refund, as indicated above. The assessing officer shall pass appropriate consequential orders in this regard, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. **Sd/-C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE** **Sd/-R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE** lsn/bka **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **16** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 110/2017** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.32130588205/2010-11 DATED 27-08-2012 UNDER KVAT ACT** **ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 08.04.2013 IN KVATA NO.956 OF 2012 ANNEXURE C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN T.A.(VAT) No.184 OF 2016 DATED 31.10.2016.** **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **17** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 117/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.32130588205/2011-12 DATED 27-08-2012 UNDER KVAT ACT ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 08.04.2013 IN KVATA NO.961 OF 2012. ANNEXURE C PHOTO COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN T.A.(VAT) No.183 OF 2016 DATED 31.10.2016.** **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **18** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 120/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**ANNEXURE A**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE**| |---|---| ||**COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PAYYANNNUR DATED**| ||**18.10.2012**| |**ANNEXURE B**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PROCCEDINGS OF THE DEPUTY**| ||**COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-II COMMERCIAL TAXES,**| ||**KOZHIKODE DATED 08.04.2013**| |**ANNEXURE C**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL**| ||**DATED 24.11.2016**| |**ANNEXURE C1**|**TRUE COPY OF ANNEXURE C**| ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **19** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 124/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PAYYANNUR DATED 18.10.2012 ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-II COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE DATED 08.04.2013 ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 24.11.2016 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **20** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 141/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. 32110314344/2006-07 DATED 19.04.2011 UNDER SECTION 25(1) OF THE KVAT ACT ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 25.06.2013 IN KVATA NO. 908 OF 2011 ANNEXURE C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NO. 317 OF 2016 DATED 31.12.2016 ANNEXURE C-1 PHOTOCOPY OF ANNEXURE C** ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **21** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 142/2017** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**ANNEXURE A**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.**| |---|---| ||**32110314344/2010-11 DATED 25.06.2011 UNDER**| ||**SECTION 25(1) OF THE KVAT ACT**| |**ANNEXURE B**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**| ||**25.06.2013 IN KVATA NO. 859 OF 2011**| |**ANNEXURE C**|**PHOTO COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE**| ||**TRIBUNAL IN TA(VAT) NO. 318 OF 2016 DATED**| ||**31.12.2016**| ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **22** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 188/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** |**ANNEXURE A**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER**| |---|---| ||**NO.32130629932/2011-12 DATED 14.02.2014**| ||**UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE KVAT ACT.**| |**ANNEXURE B**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIED ORDER NO.**| ||**32130629932/2011-12 DATED 03.03.2014 UNDER**| ||**SECTION 66 OF THE KVAT ACT.**| |**ANNEXURE C**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**| ||**21.04.2014 IN KVATA NO.494 OF 2014.**| |**ANNEXURE D**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE**| ||**TRIBUNAL IN T.A.(VAT) No.379 OF 2016 DATED**| ||**15.02.2017.**| |**ANNEXURE D-1**|**PHOTO COPY OF ANNEXURE D.**| ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **23** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 189/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32130629932/2013-14 DATED 14.02.2014 UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE KVAT ACT. ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 21.04.2014 IN KVATA NO.493 OF 2014. ANNEXURE C PHOTO COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN T.A.(VAT) No.381 OF 2016 DATED 15.02.2017.** **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN** **OT.Rev.No.110 OF 2017 & CONNECTED CASES** **24** ## **APPENDIX OF OT.Rev 190/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**ANNEXURE A**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER**| |---|---| ||**NO.32130629932/2012-13 DATED 14.02.2014**| ||**UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE KVAT ACT.**| |**ANNEXURE B**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**| ||**21.04.2014 IN KVATA NO.494 OF 2014.**| |**ANNEXURE C**|**PHOTO COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE**| ||**TRIBUNAL IN T.A.(VAT) No.380 OF 2016 DATED**| ||**15.02.2017.**| **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **LSN**