2009 (1) TMI 812

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he petitioner is a service provider and accordingly it is paying service tax to the Union of India and as the petitioner is not liable to pay any tax under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, the Act ). It has been further submitted that according to the law laid down by the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of Ind .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the amount of tax payable by them. He has, therefore, submitted that at least one-third of the amount of tax payable should be paid by the petitioner. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn our attention to an interim order dated September 29, 2008 passed by the honourable Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s). 23247 of 2008 (Reliance Communications .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arlier orders as precedent because, interim orders are normally not treated as precedents. However, the fact remains that if this court has protected all similarly situated petitioners on a particular condition, we would not like to digress from the said practice more particularly in view of the fact that the petitions are to be notified for final hearing on February 16, 2009. We are of the view t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X