1998 (8) TMI 545 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 520 dated July 20, 1988 regarding eligibility for concessional rate of duty for NICD batteries and other batteries as components of electronic goods.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh addressed the issue of whether NICD batteries and other batteries manufactured by the assessee are eligible for a concessional rate of duty under G.O. Ms. No. 520 dated July 20, 1988. The Tribunal had initially held that these batteries are indeed eligible for the concessional rate of duty, which was challenged by the Revenue in the present T.R.Cs.

The main argument put forth by the Revenue was that NICD and other batteries should not be considered as electronic goods as they do not fall under the twelve items enumerated in the said G.O. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent contended that batteries manufactured by them are eligible for the concessional rate of duty as per the G.O., citing a note appended to the G.O. which included batteries as part of the list of electronic components entitled to the concessional rate of duty.

To analyze the arguments presented, the Court referred to the specific provisions of G.O. Ms. No. 520 dated July 20, 1988. The G.O. defined "electronic goods" as various electronic systems, instruments, appliances, and components, including batteries under the category of electronic components. Additionally, a note attached to the G.O. clarified that the concessional rate of duty is extended to electronic goods listed by the Electronics Commission, which includes batteries as electronic components.

Furthermore, the Court highlighted that G.O. Ms. No. 520 was issued under the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, and a similar G.O. (Ms. No. 521) issued under the Central Sales Tax Act also provided for a concessional rate of duty for electronic goods, with items matching those in G.O. Ms. No. 520. Therefore, the interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 520 applied to G.O. Ms. No. 521 as well. Since batteries were considered electronic components according to the list prepared by the Electronics Commission, they were deemed eligible for the concessional rate of duty under both G.Os.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the batteries manufactured by the assessee were entitled to the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under the relevant G.Os. Consequently, the T.R.Cs. filed by the Revenue were dismissed as lacking merit, with no costs awarded.