TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the time extended by the Supreme Court for limitation during the pandemic applied to a revisional authority acting under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005; (ii) Whether liquid carbon dioxide falls within Entry 100(190) of Schedule-IV of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005.
Issue (i): Whether the time extended by the Supreme Court for limitation during the pandemic applied to a revisional authority acting under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005.
Analysis: The revisional power under Section 32(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was time-bound. The Supreme Court orders extending limitation were issued to protect litigants who were prevented from approaching courts and tribunals, and that protection was held not to extend the time available to a statutory authority to pass orders under a taxing statute. On that footing, the revisional order was beyond the prescribed period and could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee. The revisional order was time-barred and non est.
Issue (ii): Whether liquid carbon dioxide falls within Entry 100(190) of Schedule-IV of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005.
Analysis: Entry 100(190) covered other inorganic acids and other inorganic oxygen compounds of non-metals and was treated as corresponding to HSN Heading 2811. Liquid carbon dioxide is an oxygen compound of carbon, which is a non-metal, and the entry did not qualify carbon dioxide as gaseous only. The absence of any such restriction meant that carbon dioxide, whether in gaseous or liquid form, fell within the covered entry. A new plea based on purchaser declaration and Note 6 was not part of the original revision and could not be used to support the impugned order.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee. Liquid carbon dioxide was held taxable under Entry 100(190) of Schedule-IV, not under the unclassified category.
Final Conclusion: The revisional assessment was unsustainable both on limitation and on classification, and the writ petition succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: Supreme Court orders extending limitation during the pandemic protect litigants seeking recourse to judicial or tribunal forums, but do not enlarge the statutory time available to an adjudicating or revisional authority; in classification, liquid carbon dioxide falls within the relevant inorganic oxygen-compound entry where no gaseous-only restriction is expressed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
