Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        VAT and Sales Tax

        2009 (7) TMI 751 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Supreme Court clarifies interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 108 and jurisdiction on writ applications The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's interpretation that G.O. Ms. No. 108 should be read independently, not with earlier G.Os. It clarified that ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                            Supreme Court clarifies interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 108 and jurisdiction on writ applications

                            The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's interpretation that G.O. Ms. No. 108 should be read independently, not with earlier G.Os. It clarified that "base turnover" refers to the quantity of goods produced. The Court supported the High Court's jurisdiction to entertain writ applications directly against assessment orders. Civil appeals arising from specific cases were dismissed, while appeals by Suryachandra Paper Mills Limited were allowed with costs.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 108 dated May 20, 1996.
                            2. Whether the new policy should be read with earlier G.Os.
                            3. Definition and application of "base turnover."
                            4. High Court's jurisdiction in entertaining writ applications directly against orders of assessment.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 108 dated May 20, 1996:
                            The central issue revolves around the interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 108 dated May 20, 1996, which introduced a new industrial policy called "Target 2000" to accelerate industrial development in Andhra Pradesh. The G.O. provided incentives such as subsidies, tax holidays, and deferment of tax for new and expanding industries. The respondents, who are owners of various industries, applied for and were granted eligibility certificates for the expansion of their factories under this G.O., allowing them to defer sales tax to the extent of 135% of their capital investment.

                            2. Whether the new policy should be read with earlier G.Os:
                            The State argued that G.O. Ms. No. 108 should be read in conjunction with earlier G.Os. However, the court held that G.O. Ms. No. 108 is an independent and complete code by itself, not requiring reference to earlier G.Os. The court emphasized that the new policy was introduced to replace the old schemes and should be interpreted on its own terms. The term "modification" used in G.O. Ms. No. 108 was interpreted to mean a change that introduces new elements into the details but leaves the general purpose intact.

                            3. Definition and application of "base turnover":
                            The term "base turnover" was a significant point of contention. The court explained that "base turnover" in G.O. Ms. No. 108 refers to the best "production achieved" during the three years preceding the year of expansion or the "maximum capacity expected to be achieved" by the industry, as appraised by financial institutions. The court clarified that "base turnover" refers to the turnover of the quantity in goods and not its monetary value. This interpretation was crucial in determining the eligibility for tax deferment benefits. The court noted that the G.O. did not mention the amount of sales tax paid in earlier years or the maintenance of local sales as relevant factors for the scheme's enforcement.

                            4. High Court's jurisdiction in entertaining writ applications directly against orders of assessment:
                            The State contended that the High Court should not have entertained writ applications directly against the orders of assessment, arguing that the entrepreneurs should have exhausted their remedies under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. However, the court held that since the Tribunal had already expressed its views on the matter, appealing to the appellate authority or the Tribunal would have been an idle formality. Therefore, the High Court's decision to entertain the writ applications was justified.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's interpretation of G.O. Ms. No. 108, affirming that it should be read independently and not in conjunction with earlier G.Os. The court emphasized that "base turnover" refers to the quantity of goods produced rather than their monetary value. The court also supported the High Court's jurisdiction in entertaining writ applications directly against the orders of assessment. Consequently, the civil appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 18795, 19104, 21482 of 2006, 489, 12440, and 12151 of 2007 were dismissed, while the appeals filed by Suryachandra Paper Mills Limited were allowed with costs.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found