1999 (9) TMI 929 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment addresses the jurisdiction of the revisional authority, the inclusion of excise duty paid by purchasers in the manufacturer's turnover, and whether service charges should be considered part of the turnover.

Jurisdiction of the revisional authority:
The Court considered the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner to revise orders, emphasizing that the Deputy Commissioner can only revise orders of subordinate officers, not those of equivalent rank, as per section 20(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act.

Inclusion of excise duty in turnover:
The dispute centered on whether excise duty paid by customers should be included in the manufacturer's turnover. The Tribunal upheld that the primary duty to pay excise duty lies with the manufacturer and forms part of the sale consideration, hence should be treated as part of the total turnover.

Legal position on excise duty:
The Court referred to various decisions, including the McDowell cases, to establish that excise duty is a burden borne by the manufacturer, even if paid by customers for convenience. The excise duty is considered part of the sale price and turnover, as clarified by the Supreme Court.

Decision and outcome:
The Court dismissed multiple tax revision cases while allowing one based on jurisdictional grounds. The judgment upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the inclusion of excise duty in the turnover, emphasizing the manufacturer's primary responsibility for paying excise duty.