| Case ID |
4509a86f-dcc5-40d3-9aee-3ee09a530601 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No. 1725 of 1977 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 12, 1986 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by Bakul Cashew Co. and others against the judgment of the Kerala High Court. The High Court had upheld the government's cancellation of a notification that granted retrospective tax exemption under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. The court ruled that the government lacked the power to grant such exemptions retrospectively at the time the notification was issued. The principle of promissory estoppel was also not applicable as the appellants could not show that they relied on the government's representation to their detriment. The court emphasized that the legislative power to grant exemptions could not be exercised retrospectively unless expressly authorized by the legislature. The decision reinforced the importance of clarity in legislative provisions regarding exemptions and the limits of subordinate legislation. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Bakul Cashew Co. vs. Sales Tax Officer, the Supreme Court of India addressed critical issues surrounding the interpretation of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, particularly Section 10 concerning the power of the government to grant tax exemptions. The appellants contended that they were entitled to a retrospective exemption from sales tax on cashew nuts imported from Africa, based on a government notification issued in 1973. However, the government later canceled this notification, leading to the legal dispute. The court examined the principles of promissory estoppel, legislative authority, and the requirement for clear and unambiguous representations from the government. Ultimately, the court ruled against the appellants, emphasizing that the government had no authority to grant retrospective exemptions at that time. This case is significant for its implications on tax law and the powers of government in legislative matters, highlighting the need for precise statutory language in exemption provisions. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of India
|
| Entities Involved |
Kerala Government,
Cashew Corporation of India,
Bakul Cashew Co.
|
| Judges |
E. S. Venkataramiah,
M. P. Thakkar
|
| Lawyers |
P. Govindan Nair, Senior Advocate,
Mrs. A. K. Verma,
S. Sukumaran,
D. N. Misra, Advocates,
T. S. Krishnamurthy Iyer, Senior Advocate,
Karunakara Nambiar,
V. L. Francis, Advocates
|
| Petitioners |
Bakul Cashew Co. and Others
|
| Respondents |
Another,
Sales Tax Officer, Quilon
|
| Citations |
1988 SLD 373,
(1988) 57 TAX 6
|
| Other Citations |
ITO v. M. C. Ponnose [1970] 75 ITR 174(SC),
Dr. Indramani Pyarelal Gupta v. W.R. Natu [1963] 1 SCR 721,
Modi Food Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1955] 6 STC 287(All),
India Sugars Refineries Ltd. v. State of Mysore, AIR 1960 Mys 326,
General S. Shivdev Singh v. State of the Punjab [1959] PLR 514 [FB]
|
| Laws Involved |
Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963
|
| Sections |
10
|