2015 (6) TMI 1103 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Sale - whether removal of Beedi leaves from the forest under the trade permit granted under the A.P. Minor Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade in Abnus Leaves) Rules, would amount to sale and attracts liability of payment of Sales Tax? Held that - by judgment in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. ITC Bhadrachalam Paper Boards Division, Khammam District 2014 (12) TMI 998 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT , Court had specifically posed a question in relation to the Bamboo, whether removal of forest produce would amount to sale. This Court held that there is no sale involved - the question is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue - revision application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of the order of revision made by the Deputy Commissioner
2. Applicability of a specific judgment by the Supreme Court to the case
3. Whether removal of Beedi leaves under a trade permit attracts liability of Sales Tax

Analysis:

1. The appeal before the High Court arose from an order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, regarding the validity of the revision made by the Deputy Commissioner. The substantial questions of law raised pertained to the validity, propriety, and sustainability of the revision order.

2. The High Court noted that the questions raised in the appeal were not properly framed by the Revenue. The specific issue was whether the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd, delivered by a 3-judge bench, was applicable to the present case.

3. The primary issue for consideration was whether the removal of Beedi leaves from the forest under a trade permit would amount to a sale and attract liability for payment of Sales Tax. The Tribunal had ruled in favor of the assessee, citing the judgment in the Titaghur Paper Mills case, which held that such removal did not constitute a sale. The Tribunal also highlighted that a 2-judge Bench judgment relied upon by the Assessing Officer had been overruled by the Supreme Court in the Titaghur case.

4. The High Court referred to its own judgment in a previous case involving the removal of forest produce, where it was held that such removal did not amount to a sale. In light of this precedent, the High Court concluded that the question of law required to be answered in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue.

5. Consequently, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, dismissing the tax revision case with no costs. The judgment was based on the interpretation of relevant legal principles and precedents, including decisions by the Supreme Court and previous judgments by the High Court.

This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues raised in the appeal before the High Court, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal reasoning and conclusions reached by the court.