RAMAKRISHNA ENTERPRISES Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed against orders of Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad dated 22.8.1995 in Appeal No. 527/94 -95 confirming the orders of the Commercial Tax Officer in his proceedings G.I. No. 10657/89 -90, dated 13.2.1995. Following are the facts leading to filing of this appeal. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer -I, Nizamabad during the year 1989 -90 completed the assessment of the appellant and while passing orders, regarding turnover on which tax is to be collected after consideration of the record placed before him by the assessee, exempted an amount of Rs. 30,790/ - treating it as an amount relatable to transit sales of electrical goods made by the appellant assessee to Nizamabad Co -operative Sugar Factory Ltd., Nizamabad presumably for consideration for assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act. However, while passing the APGST order, the Learned Dy. Commercial Tax Officer -I, Nizamabad held specifically in his order that this amount representing the electrical goods sold by the appellant assessee to the Nizamabad Co -operative Sugar Factory Limited, as, a transit sale on the ground that the appellant assessee has produced, 'C form and necessary E1 form. But the Commercial Tax Officer, Nizamabad having opined that the Dy. Commercial Tax Officer has committed an error in exempting the said amount, took up a suo motu revision in the proceedings above referred in G.I. No. 10657/89 -90, dated 13.2.1995 and held that the Dy. Commercial Tax Officer committed an error in exempting the said amount from APGST turnover mainly on the ground that the sale of electrical goods to the Nizamabad Co -operative Sugar Factory Limited cannot be held as a transit sale, as the 'C form produced by the assessee furnished to it by the Nizamabad Co -operative Sugar Factory cannot be acted upon to exempt electrical goods sold to Nizamabad Co -op. Sugar Factory. Therefore, he directed that the said amount should be added to taxable turnover of the sales under APGST. However, while adopting the turnover for withdrawing exemption, the Commercial Tax Officer withdrew exemption on a turnover of Rs. 45,360/ - instead of on a turnover of Rs. 30,790/ - which was allowed by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said revisional orders of the Commercial Tax Officer, this appellant has preferred an appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad, who after consideration in Appeal No. 527/94 -95 has dismissed the appeal confirming the orders of the Commercial Tax Officer disagreeing with the appellant's contention.

(3.) THE Learned Advocate for the appellant also contended that the Commercial Tax Officer has committed an error in treating this sale transaction as a local sale to be included in APGST sales he contended that it is factually incorrect. He contended that Commercial Tax Officer, who originally passed the orders of assessment has categorically mentioned in his order that the appellate assessee has produced the 'C form given to it by Nizamabad Cooperative Sugar Factory, besides E1 form showing that it is a transit sale defined under law. Therefore, he contended that whether or not the appellant assessee is entitled for exemption from payment of tax, this amount of Rs. 45,360/ - should be considered only under the turnover for assessment under Central Sales Tax Act and by no means this amount can be treated as local sales to include in the turnover to be taxed under APGST