TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (7) TMI 654
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d and sold by the petitioner. The assessee is engaged in the manufacture of rubberised coir mattresses, pillows, cushions, bath mats, packing material, etc., in the name and style of Fibre Foam (P) Limited at Baliapattam, Cannanore. In the assessment for the year 1991-92 both under the KGST Act and under the CST Act assessee claimed exemption in respect of the sales turnover of rubberised coir products manufactured by it for the period from January 1, 1992 to March 31, 2002 under the Notification, S.R.O. No. 432/91. The assessing authority on the basis of a certificate dated February 23, 1997 issued by M/s. Intercontinental Marketing Corporation, Ernakulam, the sole selling agents of the petitioner, in which they have certified that they so....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Entry 162 of the First Schedule at 4 per cent. The counsel further pointed out that the purchase of rubber latex effected by the assessee was granted exemption under S.R.O. No. 585/80, which is available only for the purchase of raw materials used in the manufacture of rubberised products by small scale rubber industrial units. The counsel also submitted that the certificate issued by their sole selling agents relied on by the authorities only says that they had sold the products of the assessee, whose name is fibre foam. The counsel accordingly submitted that the authorities and the Tribunal were not justified in denying exemption under the Notification, S.R.O. No. 432/91 to the petitioner. 3.. The learned Government Pleader appear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respect of the purchase turnover of rubber latex used in the manufacture of rubber products. The assessing authority had granted the concessional rate of 3 per cent to the petitioner under the said notification. From the aforesaid conduct of the assessing authority, it would appear that the assessing authority himself had treated the product of the petitioner as rubberised coir product. 5.. However, the question is not as to whether the product of the petitioner is a rubberised coir product. The real question is whether the product of the petitioner is fibre foam. This distinction is required to be drawn only because the Government in their Notification S.R.O. No. 432/91 had granted exemption only in respect of rubberised coir products o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fibre foam products", in other words, the products of the assessee, are sold. 6.. According to us, none of the authorities, including the Tribunal had addressed the question in the proper perspective. The assessing authority and the two appellate authorities, instead of searching for evidences in the form of correspondence, etc., should have verified the very product of the assessee with respect to which the exemption was claimed either by directing the assessee to produce the product before the assessing authority or before the appellate authorities. The appellate authorities could have even directed the assessing authority to conduct an inspection of the said product by visiting the petitioner's premises and find out as to what exactly w....