AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramesh Ranganathan, J.—The question which arises for consideration in both these revisions is the same and as such are being disposed of by a common order. The respondent preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam assailing the order of the Deputy Commissioner (CT, Vijayawada) revising the assessment for the years 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 and withdrawing the exemptions granted by the assessing officer to the appellant on payment of sales tax basing on G.O.Ms. No. 314 dated 28.04.1988 and G.O.Ms. No. 31 dated 11.01.1991. The Deputy Commissioner levied tax @ 4% relying on the judgment in TRC. Nos. 82 and 83 of 2011 dated 21.12.2011 wherein this Court held that when the TTD and GCS are exempted from payment of sales tax on purchases and sales made by them, the appellants, who are their dealers, are also exempted from paying the tax; and the revenue could not levy and collect tax on the sales effected by the petitioners therein to a buyer who is exempt from payment of purchase tax. The appeals were remanded by the Tribunal with a direction to the assessing authority to make a thorough enquiry to ascertain whether the respective appellants had charged tax from the TTD and GCS and had collected tax at the time of first sale of red gram dal to the TTD and GCS with reference to the tender conditions, books of accounts and other relevant documentary evidence; if it is found that the appellants did not charge any tax from the TTD and GCS on the said first sale of red gram dal, G.O.Ms. No. 162 dated 03.04.2002 should given effect to, and exemption under G.O.Ms. No. 314 dated 28.04.1988 and G.O.Ms. No. 31 dated 11.01.1991 should be granted to them; if, on the other hand, it was found that they had charged and collected tax from the TTD and GCS on the said first sale of red gram dal, they were not entitled to any such exemption; and tax should, accordingly, be levied. The assessing authority was directed to complete the said exercise in making an enquiry to that effect within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order.
As the order under revision is based on a judgment of this Court in TRC. Nos. 82 and 83 of 2011 dated 21.12.2011, and on a subsequent G.O. i.e. G.O.Ms. No. 162 dated 03.04.2002, the said order of the Tribunal does not necessitate interference in revision proceedings. Suffice it to observe that, as the period of 45 days has already elapsed, the period for completion of the enquiry is extended by a further period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. In all other respects, the Tax Revision Cases fail and are, accordingly, dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.