AUTO ROLLEX Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this tax revision case, two questions are raised : (1) subjecting sale turnover of Rs. 3,61,895 representing the sales of parts/spare parts of rolling shutters to tax at 6 per cent instead of 4 per cent; (2) restriction of labour charges on the fabrication and fixing of rolling shutters, which is treated as works contract, to Rs. 1,11,116 only by applying the percentage of deduction towards labour charges to 30 per cent.

(2.) AS regards the first item, the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal took the view that the items sold cannot be regarded as steel structurals, namely, angles, joints, channels or any other rolled sections and they have to be treated as general unclassified goods being parts/spare parts of rolling shutters. No exception can be taken to this finding. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the items such as angles, flats, sheets which are declared goods falling under entry 2 (v) of the Third Schedule were sold and such sales cannot be taxed at more than 4 per cent under section 6 of the A. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 read with the Third Schedule. We find it difficult to accept this contention. The sale turnover that has been subjected to tax does not apparently relate to mild steel pipes, angles, flats and other steel items which are purchased within the State. That turnover has been exempted by the assessing authority itself. What has been subjected to tax is the first sales of parts and spare parts of rolling shutters, as seen from the assessment order. If in fact the petitioner had purchased rolled steel sections such as angles, joints and channels, the petitioner would have claimed exemption on the turnover of Rs. 3,61,895. The question of disputing the rate of tax does not at all arise. This itself is an indication that the sale turnover which was taxed at 6 per cent does not relate to the items of declared goods in entry 2 of the Third Schedule. The contention of the petitioner is, therefore, liable to be rejected.

(3.) AS regards the next question, both the appellate authorities including the Tribunal held that no break-up of labour charges has been furnished and the component of labour charge for each item of work was not evident from the accounts. Hence, the deduction of 30 per cent as prescribed by rule 6 (2) (iv) of the A. P. General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 was rightly adopted by the assessing authority. We see no legal infirmity in the order of the Tribunal. In the result, the T. R. C. is dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed. .