Civil Appeal Nos. 6469-6470 of 2002 and 7169 of 2004. Case: 1. Hawkins Cookers Limited, 2. Talent Marketing Agencies Vs 1. State of Kerala., [Alongwith Civil Appeal No. 1203 of 2008], 2. Additional Sales Tax Officer, Ernakulam and Anr.. Supreme Court

Court:Supreme Court
Issue:Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 - Section 35
Counsel:For Appearing Parties: T.L.V. Iyer, Sr. Adv., Gopal Jain, Kaushik Mishra, Bindu K. Nair, Sarika Singh, Ruby Singh Ahuja, K.R. Sasiprabhu, Krishan Venugopal, K. Vraghese, Sidhartha, Naresh Kumar, G. Prakash, Beena Prakash and Varun Sarin, Advs. for Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv
Judgement Date:April 29, 2008
Party Name:1. Hawkins Cookers Limited, 2. Talent Marketing Agencies Vs 1. State of Kerala., [Alongwith Civil Appeal No. 1203 of 2008], 2. Additional Sales Tax Officer, Ernakulam and Anr.
Case Number:Civil Appeal Nos. 6469-6470 of 2002 and 7169 of 2004
Citation:2008 (226) ELT 481 (SC), JT 2008 (6) SC 237, 2008 (2) KLT 610 (SC), 2008 (6) SCALE 657, (2008) 14 VST 375 (SC)
Judges:Ashok Bhan and Dalveer Bhandari, JJ.
 
FREE EXCERPT

Judgment:

Ashok Bhan, J.

  1. This order shall dispose of Civil Appeal Nos. 6469- 6470 of 2002, 7169 of 2004 and 1203 of 2008.

    Civil Appeal Nos. 6469-6470 of 2002 & 1203 of 2008

  2. The issue which arises for consideration in these appeals is, whether the satilon brand cookware sold by the appellants is an "aluminium household utensil made of aluminum" and "aluminium alloys" classifiable under Entry 5 of the First Schedule under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short "the Act") or whether the said product would fall under Entry 104 which pertains to "pressure cooker, cook and serve ware to keep food warm, casseroles, water filters and similar home appliances not coming under any other entry".

  3. The authority in original i.e. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment III), Ernakulam at the first instance accepted the appellant's case and held that the Hawkins Satilon Cookware manufactured by the appellant was classifiable under Entry 5 of the First Schedule to the Act. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in exercise of his suo motu powers of revision, sought to revise the assessment. A notice dated 10.9.1999 was issued under Section 35 of the Act. Appellant replied to the said notice. The Deputy Commissioner by an order dated 25.9.1999 set aside the earlier assessment and remanded the matter for fresh disposal. The Deputy Commissioner held that as the satilon coating made the goods non-stick, it would make it different from the aluminium household utensils made of aluminium, covered under Entry 5 of the First Schedule. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, the appellant filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam (for short "the Tribunal"). The Tribunal by its order dated 18.4.2001 upheld the order of Deputy Commissioner.

  4. Against the order of the Tribunal, the appellant filed Tax Revision case before the Kerala High Court, which has been disposed of by the impugned order. The High Court by a short order while agreeing with the findings recorded by the Tribunal, dismissed the revision and held that the products manufactured by the appellants were classifiable under the heading "similar home appliances" under Entry 104 of the Act. It was further held that the amendment to Entry 104 in the year 1999 by which the word "non-stick cookware" was added was only clarificatory in nature. The case of the appellant was that prior to the said amendment of 1.4.1999 the appellant's product would clearly fall under Entry...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR FREE TRIAL