C.N. Ramachandran Nair,
1. Heard senior counsel Dr. K.B. Mohammedkutty appearing for the petitioner and Government Pleader Sri Mohammed Rafeeq appearing for the respondent. The question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the petitioner-assessee is liable to pay tax on the last purchase of ginger which is exported in powdered form. Exemption u/s 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act was declined for the reason that the commodity purchased on which tax is payable at the point of last purchase in the State under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act is not exported in the same form. We notice from the order of the Tribunal that they have only followed Full Bench decision of this court in Suresh Kumar Vs. State of Kerala, , which is in respect of conversion of tamarind seed into tamarind seed powder which this court held amounts to manufacture. The Tribunal has also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Rajasthan Roller Flour Mills Association and another Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, , wherein the Supreme Court held that atta, maida, etc., are different commercial products with different identity and use. It is also seen that the Tribunal has relied on decision of this court in Tatson Food Industries Vs. State of Kerala, , wherein this court held that turmeric and turmeric powder are not the same goods. So much so, the Tribunal has held that ginger powder is a manufactured product obtained from ginger and therefore the petitioner is liable to pay tax on the ginger in terms of scheduled entry which provides for tax at the point of last purchase in the State, no matter the assessee has powdered and exported the ginger. Since the Tribunal decided the issue based on several decisions of this court and that of the Supreme Court, which are squarely applicable to the facts of this case, we dismiss the sales tax revision case.
