Dismissed

M\S.Choadhary Brothers Hyd v. S.A.P Its Sec C.T.D HYDAND2ORS

Telangana HC1 Nov 2012TRC/168/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the revenue's revision petition. The Court held that auto track trailers fall within Entry-I of the 1st Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, which enumerates all varieties of trailers. Consequently, the assessee was correctly liable for tax at 10% as the claimed concessional rate was not applicable. The Tribunal was found to have no error of law.

What did the court decide?

The revision was dismissed with no merits found. No costs awarded to the petitioner.

M\S.Choadhary Brothers Hyd Vs S.A.P Its Sec C.T.D… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶2

T.R.C.No.168 of 1999

¶3

JUDGMENT (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram):

¶4

Heard Sri M.Papa Reddy, learned counsel for the revision petitioner-assessee and Sri P.Balaji Varma, learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes for the respondent-Revenue.

¶5

2. This revision under Section 22 (1) of the APGST Act (Act) is preferred against the order dated 0104-1999 of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad in T.A.No.10 of 1995. The Assessing Authority, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and the Tribunal concurred to hold that the concessional rate of tax of 4% on the turnover relating to sales of auto track trailers is not applicable and the turnover is liable to levy of tax at 10%; and that provisions of G.O.Ms.No.130 Revenue, dated 14-02-1989, on the basis of which the concessional rate of tax is claimed by the assessee, is inapplicable to auto track trailers.

¶6

3. It requires to be noticed that the Tribunal while rejecting the appeal and confirming the order of the

¶7

Primary and Appellate Authorities, held that the goods “auto track trailers” fall within the description of goods enumerated in Entry-I of the Ist Schedule to the Act and that the contention of the appellant assessee that the ‘auto track trailers’ do not fall under Entry-1 of the Ist Schedule to the Act has not been taken either before the Assessing Authority or before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner in the appeal or even in the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal.

¶8

4. Entry 1 of the Ist schedule to the Act enumerates inter alia all varieties of trailers by whatever name known. Thus on a true and fair construction of the goods enumerated in Entry 1 of the Ist Schedule, ‘auto track trailers’ fall within the said Entry.

¶9

5. On the aforesaid analyses, we find no error of law in the interpretation of Entry 1 of the Ist Schedule to the Act by the Tribunal, warranting revisional interference.

¶10

6. The Revision is without merits and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

¶11

____________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶12

__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶13

Date:01-11-2012 kvr

M\S.Choadhary Brothers Hyd v. S.A.P Its Sec C.T.D HYDAND2ORS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M\S.Choadhary Brothers Hyd v. S.A.P Its Sec C.T.D HYDAND2ORS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Ranga Builders and Contracting Company, Vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Sri Gurraiah, Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-1

M/s. Ranga Builders and Contracting Company, Vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) (Ltu)

Stat Hyd Vs M/S.Kanaka Durga Agro Oil Products Ltd.

S.A.P. S.R./ S.T.A.T Hyd. Vs M\S. Srinivas Surya Chandra W.G.Dist

Stat. Hyd Vs M/S Ajantha Products W.G Dt