STATE OF A.P. Vs. SIEMENS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Tax Revision Case is preferred by the Revenue seeking revision of the orders dated 14.06.2000 in T.A. No. 320/1995 passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad (for brevity STAT) by raising the following two questions of law for adjudication.

(2.) HEARD the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, the learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material placed on record.

(3.) THE applicability or otherwise of Section 10 -(A) of the Act is required to be considered in the facts of this case. The Tribunal, as a matter of fact, found and waived the penalty as under: It is to be seen in the case on hand that the assessing authority has dropped proceedings under APGST Act originally initiated and show cause notice issued as per 19.06.1987 and has finally passed orders holding that there was no transit sale also under CST Act. Having given exemption under APGST Act, on the ground that their alleged transit, sales, covered by CST Act, the assessing authority did not impose tax under CST Act also on the disputed transactions. This made the appellant not filing the appeal against those assessment orders. However, it is also the case of the appellant that this transit sale is covered by a second sale coming under Section 6(2). The assessing authority has not imposed tax on the appellant that there was no transfer of interest in goods that were used in works contract has not accepted the case of the appellant that there was a transit sale covered by Section 6(2) of the APGST Act. It is also significant to notice that the AC.T.O., who initiated the proceedings imposing penalty, remained silent for nearly four and half years until the appeal time is over for filing appeal by the appellant against the assessment orders even though no tax has been imposed but because of holding it as not a transit sale.