Disposed

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Chief Manager (Telecom) , U.P. East Circle Thru. Prin. G.M. v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax U.P. Vibhuti Khand , Gomti Nagar Lucknow

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2025STRE/38/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sales/Trade Tax revision by a telecom company against a Tribunal order; admitted on substantial questions of law regarding levy of sales tax where service tax was paid, and interim stay of execution granted.

What did the court decide?

Revision admitted on substantial questions of law; execution of the impugned order dated 11.06.2025 for assessment year 2010-11 stayed.

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Chief Manager (Telecom) , U.P. East Circle Thru. Prin. G.M. vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax U.P. Vibhuti Khand , Gomti Nagar Lucknow — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 38 of 2025

¶3

Revisionist :- M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Chief Manager (Telecom) , U.P. East Circle Thru. Prin. G.M. Opposite Party :- Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P. Vibhuti Khand , Gomti Nagar Lucknow Counsel for Revisionist :- Pradeep Agrawal,Alok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

1 . Admit on the following substantial questions of law:

¶6

" 1 . Whether the Learned Tribunal was justified in not considering the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs Union of India reported in (2006) 3 SCC page 1 as well as the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Idea Mobile Communication Ltd. Vs. CCE & Customs, Cochin reported in (2011) 12 SCC 608 wherein it has categorically held that if the service tax is paid than no sales tax is payable, since the Applicant provides only telecommunication services on which service tax has already been paid.

¶7

2 . Whether the Learned Tribunal was justified in not considering the fact that the electromagnetic waves and radio frequencies are not "goods" within the meaning of the word either in Article 366(12) or for purposes of Article 366(29-A)(d) or in the state legislation as held by the Apex Court.

¶8

4 . Whether the learned Tribunal was right in not considering the fact that the basic telephones for the value of Rs.1,34,20,955/- have not been sold to the subscribers and only a security/ installation is charged and the same is refundable on surrendering the connection.

¶9

5. Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in not appreciating the fact and law that providing of modem to the subscriber is a telecommunication service and not a sale, and on such service, the service tax is paid and thus trade tax is not leviable."

¶10

2 . List for hearing along with the records of Sales/ Trade Tax Revision No.27 of 2025.

¶11

3 . In the meanwhile, the execution in pursuance to the impugned order dated 11.06.2025 passed in Appeal No.76 of 2021 for the assessment year 2010-11 shall remain stayed.

¶12

Order Date :- 5.8.2025 akverma

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Chief Manager (Telecom) , U.P. East Circle Thru. Prin. G.M. v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax U.P. Vibhuti Khand , Gomti Nagar Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Chief Manager (Telecom) , U.P. East Circle Thru. Prin. G.M. v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax U.P. Vibhuti Khand , Gomti Nagar Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C/M City Intermediate College,Barabanki Thru. Manager Sardar Alok Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Secondary Education and 3 Others

Baba Vishwanath Shivphool Shikshan Sewa Sansthan Thru Manager Sumit Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education Lko. and 4 Others

Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Dr. Ajay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Mushahab Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. and 11 Others

Smt. Savindri and 7 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 21 Others

Ravi Pratap Singh vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Ministry of Human Resources Development and 3 Others