JUDGMENT OM PRAKASH, C.J. – Heard counsel for the parties. The chief question for consideration in these revision petitions relating to the assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91, filed by the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "the assessee"), is whether leco fine which is claimed by the assessee as a form of coke, is a declared commodity within the meaning of item 2(i) of the Second Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Item 2(i) of the Second Schedule runs as under : "2(i) Coal including coke in all its forms but excluding charcoal." Coal including coke in all its forms being a declared commodity is chargeable to tax at the rate of four per cent. The contention of the assessee is that leco fine is nothing but a form of coke and hence it is a declared commodity, exigible to tax at the rate of four per cent. The assessing authority also treated the leco fine as coke and taxed the same at the rate of four per cent. The Deputy Commissioner, exercising powers under section 35 of the KGST Act, however, observed as under : "Further the leco fines purchased from unregistered dealers without payment of tax was seen assessed only at four per cent instead of five per cent. Leco fines is manufactured by briquetting and carbonisation (B&C) plant of Neyveli Lignite Corporation using lignite. Lignite is produced and made briquette by using stamps and forms. The full briquettes are sold as leco (cake) and broken briquettes as sieved and sold as leco fines of various types. The leco fine is a product of lignite." The aforesaid view was taken by the Deputy Commissioner relying on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Sagar Tiles Co. v. State of Gujarat [1993] 89 STC 427. In Sagar Tiles [1993] 89 STC 427, lignite was exigible to sales tax or purchase tax, as the case may be, at the rate of ten per cent in rupee, whereas, coal or coke in all forms was assessable to tax at a lesser rate. Entry 102 of the Second Schedule, Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, refers to lignite exigible to tax at the rate of ten per cent in rupee. Entry 102 of the Second Schedule, Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, refers to lignite exigible to tax at the rate of ten per cent in rupee. Entry 1, Second Schedule, Part A provides for levy of tax of coal in all its forms (excluding charcoal) at the rate of four per cent in rupee. In para 2 of the judgment, the Gujarat High Court formulated the central question for consideration as whether lignite is coal covered by entry No. 1, Second Schedule, Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. Since there was a distinct and separate entry in regard to lignite, viz., entry 102 of the Second Schedule, the Gujarat High Court took the view that lignite would not be covered by entry 1, Second Schedule, Part A, which referred to coal in all its forms (excluding charcoal). In Second Schedule of the KGST Act, the position is entirely different, inasmuch as, there is no separate entry relating to lignite/leco fine. The only entry under item 2(i) is that, which is reproduced above. For these reasons, we are of the view that the decision of the Gujarat High Court cannot be pressed into service to decide the question whether leco fine, which, according to the learned Government Pleader, is made of lignite, is one of the forms of coke within the meaning of entry 2(i) of the Second Schedule. It is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader that leco fine is made of lignite and that lignite is obtained from the coal fields. In Hakim and Sons v. Commercial Tax Officer [1996] 101 STC 212, the Karnataka High Court held that both coal and leco are taken out from the coal mines and that leco is coal in different forms. The Madras High Court in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. B. R. Kuppuswami Chetty [1980] 45 STC 308 held that leco is a kind of lignite and that comes within the category of coal and unless excluded from that category, it has to be classified only as coal. The Madras High Court in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. B. R. Kuppuswami Chetty [1980] 45 STC 308 held that leco is a kind of lignite and that comes within the category of coal and unless excluded from that category, it has to be classified only as coal. Since the Government Pleader has admitted before us that leco is made of lignite which comes from coal fields, we being fortified by the decisions of the Karnataka High Court and the Madras High Court, hold that leco fine is one of the forms of coke and hence it is a declared commodity exigible to tax at the rate of four per cent. With these reasons, we hold that the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was not right in affirming the view taken by the Deputy Commissioner under section 35. Another question for consideration before us is whether freight formed part of taxable turnover. The Appellate Tribunal in this regard held as under : "........... According to the Deputy Commissioner the appellant was supplying lime to the site of the consignee using the delivery note of the appellant and therefore the transportation charges also would form part of the cost. The appellant pleads that there was specific agreement between the consignee and himself in that regard and the appellant was charging separately transportation charges for each consignment. But he did not produce any evidence to prove the contention in that regard. Therefore we are not considering this point now as the matter is still open and he can prove his eligibility for exemption before the assessing authority." From the above reproduced finding of the Appellate Tribunal, it is amply clear that the matter remained open and no final finding is recorded by the Appellate Tribunal. However, in para 5 of its orders, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. But that operative portion of the order is to be read subject to the observations made in para 3 of the order. On these facts there is nothing for us to decide. The revision petitions are, accordingly, allowed. Order on CM.P. No. 721 of 1997 in T.R.C. No. 23 of 1997. Dismissed. Petition allowed.