STATE OF KERALA Vs. NILKAMAL PLASTICS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised in the revision case filed by the State is whether the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the respondent-assessee, namely, Nilkamal Ltd., formerly known as Nilkamal Plastics Ltd., which got plastic moulded chairs manufactured from an SSI unit in Kerala under agreement, purchased and sold the same in the brand name "Nilkamal", is not liable to pay sales tax as brand name holder under Section 5(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter called "the Act"). The W.P. (C)s. are filed by the assessee challenging their subsequent assessments as brand name holders under Section 5(2) of the Act. We have heard Government Pleader appearing for the State which filed the revision case and advocates Sri K. Srikumar and Sri R. Muralidharan appearing for the assessee.

(2.) The Government Pleader relied on our recent judgment in S.T. Rev. No. 445 of 2006 and connected cases in the case of State of Kerala v. Oxford Mouldings (P) Ltd., wherein we have reversed order of the very same Tribunal on the very same issue. The Government Pleader submitted that the facts of this case are similar to the case decided by this Court because in that case also the product, the brand name holder got manufactured through SSI unit, is plastic moulded chair and sold under the marketing company's brand name "Regal". However, Counsel appearing for the assessee contended that facts of this case are not same to apply the judgment in the other case. Therefore, we have heard in detail the arguments of the Government Pleader and the Counsel appearing for the assessee and have also perused the orders of the Tribunal and that of the lower authorities and have gone through the terms of agreement between the parties.

(3.) The assessee has produced photocopy of the memorandum of under standing executed between the executive director of the assessee-company and the executive director of the SSI unit, Kaveri Pet and Polyforms Pvt. Ltd., located at Kolencherry in Kerala. It is conceded that apart from memorandum of understanding, there is no other agreement between the parties. It is worthwhile to refer to some of the Clauses in the agreement executed in the form of memorandum of understanding between the parties and the said Clauses are extracted hereunder: