S.V. INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the appellant against the revision orders of the Joint Commissioner (CT) (Legal), O/o Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, A.P., at Hyderabad (herein after referred to as 'J.C.), vide CCT's Ref. (LV)(2)/2100/98, dt. 1.11.99 who revised the appeal orders of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Vijayawada, herein after referred to as ADC(CT), who allowed the appeal vide his Appeal No. VJA II 142/96 -97, dt. 26.11.96 by setting aside the orders of the assessing authority i.e., CTO, Krishnalanka Circle, Vijayawada, (for short, 'CTO') in G.I. No. 2032/95 -96, dt. 31.08.1996 under the APGST Act 1957 (for short, 'Act'). The appellants are the registered dealers doing business in sales of aluminum Hardware goods. As per their registration certificate under the Act they are doing business in aluminium hardware and building fittings. As per their letter pad they are manufacturers and suppliers of all kinds of aluminium hardware and building fittings. As per his statement dated 26.12.1995 at the time of inspection they mainly deal in aluminium hardware and brass fittings. On the day of inspection the stock of pipe brackets, handles, knobs, aldrops, tower bolts, hinges, door closures, etc., was available in the business premises. Even in the returned used way bills of the appellants, the goods sold by them are described by themselves as 'Aluminium hardware fittings." The CTO had finally assessed the appellant under the Act for the year 1995 -96 taxing local sales of aluminium hardware @10% under entry 14A of the Sixth Schedule to the Act duly accepting the description of the goods available in their monthly returns in Form A2.

(2.) AGGRIEVED of the said assessment order, the appellant preferred an appeal with No. VJA II/142/96 -97 to the ADC (CT), who had allowed the appeal on 26.11.1996 by holding that the said hardware goods squarely fall under item No. 150 of the First Schedule to the Act. However the said order was set aside by the JC under the impugned order by holding that it would fall under 14A of the Sixth Schedule. The appellant filed this appeal questioning the said order and requested the Tribunal to set aside the same by allowing the appeal as prayed for.

(3.) THE learned Advocate for the appellant argued that the base metal is general and in singular. In view of the specific item 150 referring aluminium articles it cannot be treated as base metal hardware as mentioned in item No. 14A of Sixth Schedule and it refers only to the metals other than those mentioned in item No. 150.