High CourtsDIVISON BENCH(2017) 03 AP CK 0024

M/s. Creamline Dairy Products Limited vs Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU and another

Andhra Pradesh High Court · Decided on 27 March 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.Ramasubramanian, J.Uma Devi
CASE NUMBER
9784 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 202 words
1.

Aggrieved by an order of assessment passed under the Telangana Value Added Tax Act, 2005, for the period from 01-4-2014 to 30-6-2016, the dealer has come up with the present writ petition.

2.

Heard Dr. S.R.R. Viswanath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.Govind Reddy, learned Special Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3.

The primary ground on which the impugned order is assailed is that as per the decision rendered by the VAT Tribunal in Masqati Dairy Products v. State of A.P. [(2007) 44 APSTJ 36 (AP)], flavoured milk is exempt from payment of tax, but the Assessing Officer has imposed a tax of 14.5%.

4.

The contention of the learned Special Standing Counsel is that the decision of the Tribunal is the subject matter of a revision, but the revision has not so far been disposed of. Therefore, the 1st respondent is, at least as on date, bound by the decision of the Tribunal.

5.

In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside only insofar as the taxing of flavoured milk at 14.5% is concerned. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs.

M/s. Creamline Dairy Products Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU and another · CourtKutchehry