9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment under the Central Sales Tax Act (CST Act) for the year 1997-98 was finalised by the Commercial Tax Officer (CTO), Gajuwaka Circle, determining the taxable turnover as Rs. 1,79,420/- and levied tax on a turnover of Rs. 88,000/- @ 15% as not covered by C/D Forms. Before the Assessing Authority, the Assessee contended that the disputed turnover is relating to inter-State sales of paints and, as such, entitled for concessional rate of tax @ 7% applicable in respect of Small Scale Industrial (SSI) units, in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 252 dated 19.05.1995, and a higher rate of tax @ 10% is applicable on the said turnover under the CST Act. The Commercial Tax Officer rejected the said contentions vide Assessment Order dated 02.09.2000 and determined the tax payable at Rs.16,857/-. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the Assessee carried the matter by way of an appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kakinada, and the same was dismissed on 25.01.2001. Challenging the said order, the Assessee carried the matter to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal vide T.A.No.730 of 2001 and the same was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal. The State, challenging the said order, filed the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le of the APGST Act shall, in respect of sales of paints manufactured by cottage and small scale industries situated in the State, be @ 7 paise in the Rupee with effect from 01.04.1995. By virtue of the said G.O., though in Sixth Schedule, the rate of tax insofar as paints (Sl.No.8) was prescribed @ 15 paise in the Rupee, the same is no longer applicable to the turnover of the Assessee, which is not covered by C/D Forms. He further submits that as per Section 8 (2) (b) of the CST Act, the rate of tax whichever is higher is applicable and, therefore, the learned Appellate Tribunal was right in levying the tax on the disputed turnover @ 10%. He submits that there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal and, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. On an appreciation of the rival contentions, the only point/question of law, which is required to be determined, is, whether the inter-State sale of paints is liable for tax @ 10% or @ 15% as contended on behalf of the State. 8. It is not in dispute that Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act referred to hereunder provides for rates of tax on sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax payable on the Assessee in the case of the goods other than the declared goods shall be calculated @ 10% or at the rate applicable to the sale or purchase of such goods inside the appropriate State, whichever higher. 10. Thus, in the present case, by virtue of G.O. Ms. No. 252 dated 19.05.1995, the disputed rate of tax on turnover insofar as the State is concerned, is 7%. In the light of Section 8 (2) (b), which provides for higher rate of tax than the rate applicable in terms of the rate of tax under Sixth Schedule, the tax @ 10% on the turnover on paints is liable to be paid. The learned Appellate Tribunal, after considering these aspects in the proper perspective, in the considered opinion of this Court, has rightly allowed the appeal by fixing the tax leviable on the disputed turnover @ 10%. In such view of the matter, the question of law is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the State. 11. In the result, the Tax Revision Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao: 12. I have gone through the order and I fully concur with the view and findings given by my learned brother Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Officer has admitted that the Assessee's unit is SSI. 15. The STAT has allowed the appeal observing that the Appellate Deputy Commissioner does not refer at all rate of tax to be reduced under G.O. Ms. No. 252, which is applicable in the State and that, has straight away applied scheduled rate of 15%, though the same is reduced to 7% by G.O. Ms. No. 252, under the A.P.G.S.T. Act. Accordingly, the STAT has set aside the orders of the Assessing Officer which was confirmed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner by allowing the Appeal and directed the Assessing Authority to levy tax on the disputed turnover @ 10%. 16. Aggrieved by the orders of the STAT in Appeal No.730 of 2001 dated 10.09.2003, the present Tax Revision Case No.61 of 2004 was preferred on the substantial grounds raised by the Assessing Officer i.e. whether the disputed turnover relating to inter-State sales of paints is entitled concessional rate of tax @ 10% when the schedule rate of tax on paints is 15%, though the same is reduced to 7% by the G.O. in a specific situation, and the STAT is right in holding that the correct rate of tax is10% in view of Sixth Schedule appended to the APGST Act. 17. When the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
