Disposed

The State of aNdhra Pradesh v. M/s. Surya Granites

Telangana HC6 Feb 2014TREVC/153/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Tax Revision case challenging an appellate authority order. The court held there were no grounds to interfere with the remand order issued to the Commercial Tax Officer to reinvestigate a defective 'H' Form exemption application under the Central Sales Tax Act.

What did the court decide?

The taxation revision case was disposed of without interfering with the remand order.

The State of aNdhra Pradesh Vs M/s. Surya Granites — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

¶2

AND

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶4

TAX REVISION CASE No.153 of 2013

¶5

ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta)

¶6

The petitioner has impugned the order dated 03-06-2013 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax & VAT Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, vide which the assessment order dated 20-03-2010 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer-II, as well as the order dated 23-11-2010 of the appellate authority were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commercial Tax Officer to return the two defective ‘H’ Forms covering a turnover of Rs.68,36,620/- to the appellant under proper acknowledgment, allow adequate time for rectification of those defects and on the appellant’s resubmitting ‘H’ Forms, to allow exemption on a turnover of Rs.68,36,620/- under Section 5 (4) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. While remanding the case, a direction was also issued that the Commercial Tax Officer shall not insist for filing of a copy of the agreement between the exporter and the foreign buyer which is not mandatory according to Rule 12(10) of the CST (R&T) Rules, 1957.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for proper adjudication of the case, it would be necessary to file a copy of the agreement between the exporter and the foreign buyer.

¶8

After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, we dispose of this

¶9

revision with the observation that it would be open to the Commercial Tax Officer, to consider filing of the agreement between the exporter and the foreign buyer. As the impugned order is a remand order, we find no grounds to interfere with the same.

¶10

Accordingly, the Tax Revision Case is disposed of.

¶11

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

__________________________________ JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.

¶13

JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY.

¶14

Date : 06-02-2014 Rds

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶16

TAX REVISION CASE No.153 of 2013

¶17

Date : 06-02-2014

¶18

Rds

The State of aNdhra Pradesh v. M/s. Surya Granites

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of aNdhra Pradesh v. M/s. Surya Granites

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

The State of Ap Vs Voltas Ltd.

M/s. Chandrima Traders, Vs Authorized Office

The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs M/s Chida Spinning Mills (P) Ltd.

The State of Ap Vs M/s Hari Shankar Industries

The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs M/s Maheswari Proboiled Rice Mill, Settipalem

M/ s. Sri Vishnu Priya Rice Industires, Vs The Authorized Officer