MC DOWELL AND COMPANY LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Various questions of law pertaining to the inclusion of excise duty, paid or payable by the manufacturer, in the turnover for the purpose of sales tax have been advanced by the counsel for the petitioner. We have heard the Government Pleader on behalf of the respondent. We have in our judgment dated 2 8/02/1986 in W.P. Nos. 10181 of 1983 etc., batch (Raj Sheel v. State of Andhra pradesh (Since reported at [1987] 64 STC 398.)), after referring to the decisions of the Supreme Court, in particular to McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 59 STC 277 and Hindustan Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan [1979] 43 STC 13, in the penultimate para stated as follows :

(2.) We do not, therefore, find any reason to entertain this writ petition to the file particularly in view of the fact that it is only directed against the show cause notice issued by the first respondent.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner made a request that all further proceedings before the first respondent pursuant to the show cause notice may be stayed. We do not find any justification for staying the further proceedings before the first respondent.