2013 (7) TMI 868 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Appeal u/s 41 (7) (a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act 1963 - Held that - Section 41(7)(a) provides an application for review only on the basis of discovery of new and important facts which were not within the knowledge of the applicant or could not be produced by him when the order was made. - even if the assertion by the review petitioners is that the High Court had exercised jurisdiction beyond the terms of section 41(1) of the Act that is not a ground to entertain a review in view of section 41(7)(a) of the Act. - Appeal not maintainable.

Summary

Issues:
Review petition invoking section 41(7)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 - Validity of findings and conclusions in a judgment - Grounds for review petition - Interpretation of sections 41(1) and 41(7)(a) of the Act.

Analysis:

1. Review Petition Grounds:
The review petitions were filed under section 41(7)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, challenging the findings and conclusions in a judgment. The contention raised was that the conclusions in the judgment could not be sustained as the grounds were not raised before the Appellate Tribunal by the State. It was argued that under section 41(1) of the Act, a revision to the High Court is permissible only on the basis of erroneous decisions or failure to decide on a question of law by the Tribunal.

2. Arguments by Parties:
The review petitioners, represented by a senior advocate, argued that the issues addressed in the judgment were not raised before the Tribunal, thus questioning the validity of the conclusions reached. On the other hand, the Government Pleader contended that section 41(7)(a) allows a review only on the basis of discovering new and important facts that were not known or producible at the time of the original order. The Government Pleader emphasized that exceeding jurisdiction, as alleged by the review petitioners, does not constitute grounds for a review under section 41(7)(a).

3. Interpretation of Sections 41(1) and 41(7)(a) of the Act:
Sections 41(1) and 41(7)(a) of the Act were scrutinized by the Court. Section 41(1) outlines the grounds for seeking a revision by the High Court, emphasizing erroneous decisions or failure to decide on a question of law by the Appellate Tribunal. In contrast, section 41(7)(a) allows for a review based on the discovery of new and significant facts that were previously unknown or unattainable. The Court upheld the preliminary objection raised by the State regarding the grounds for the review petitions, leading to the dismissal of the review petitions without prejudice to other available reliefs under the law.

4. Conclusion:
The Court, after analyzing the provisions of the Act and the arguments presented by both parties, dismissed the review petitions. The decision was made in line with the interpretation of sections 41(1) and 41(7)(a) of the Act, emphasizing the necessity for adherence to the specified grounds for seeking a review. The parties were advised to seek any other available reliefs as per the law, with no costs imposed in this regard.