Skip to content


Shri Shaila Industrial and Spiritual Colony Charities Vs. State of Kerala and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtKerala High Court
Decided On
Case NumberAppeal Suit No. 558 of 1957
Judge
Reported in[1960]11STC631(Ker)
AppellantShri Shaila Industrial and Spiritual Colony Charities
RespondentState of Kerala and ors.
Appellant Advocate S. Narayanan Potti and; R. Raya Shenoi, Advs.
Respondent Advocate M.U. Issac, The Government Pleader
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
- - mis case is the tax can-not be levied because of section 4 of the madras general sales tax act and having failed before the taxing authority, he has invoked the juris- diction of this court under article 226. but the learned judge declined to interfere on the ground that the aforesaid section 4 did not cover the claim......section reads thus :the provisions of this act shall not apply to the sales of electrical energy, motor spirit as defined in the madras sales of motor spirit taxation act, 1939, manufactured tobacco as defined in the madras tobacco (taxation of sales and licensing) act, 1939 and any goods on which duty is or may be levied under the madras abkari act, 1886, the madras prohibition act, 1937, or the opium act, 1878.2. it is obvious that the provision guards against double taxation so that the dealer, who has already paid some charge on the sales of the goods under the madras abkari act, 1886, or the madras prohibition act, 1937, or the opium act, 1878, would not be liable again to pay the sales tax. the learned advocate for the appellant has argued that the words 'any goods on which duty.....
Judgment:

M.A. Ansari, C.J.

1. The appellant claims exemption from tax on sales of the French polish which he manufactures. Mis case is the tax can-not be levied because of Section 4 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act and having failed before the taxing authority, he has invoked the juris- diction of this Court under Article 226. But the learned Judge declined to interfere on the ground that the aforesaid Section 4 did not cover the claim. The section reads thus :

The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the sales of electrical energy, motor spirit as defined in the Madras Sales of Motor Spirit Taxation Act, 1939, manufactured tobacco as defined in the Madras Tobacco (Taxation of Sales and Licensing) Act, 1939 and any goods on which duty is or may be levied under the Madras Abkari Act, 1886, the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937, or the Opium Act, 1878.

2. It is obvious that the provision guards against double taxation so that the dealer, who has already paid some charge on the sales of the goods under the Madras Abkari Act, 1886, or the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937, or the Opium Act, 1878, would not be liable again to pay the sales tax. The learned Advocate for the appellant has argued that the words 'any goods on which duty is or may be levied' do not mean sales of goods so described by the words. We feel that not to be the correct interpretation, for these words are covered by the word 'sales' used earlier in the section, which means sales of all what follows. We, therefore, see no force in the appeal which is dismissed. Parties will bear their costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //