TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (5) TMI 327
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... company and they are dealers in agricultural seeds, chillies, paddy, sunflower and other crops. It is an assessee and a registered dealer under the Act. The Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda Circle, Hyderabad, framed final assessment orders in respect of the turnovers for the assessment year 1992-93 granting benefit of G.O. Ms. No. 604, Rev (S), dated April 9, 1981 and G.O. Ms. No. 129 Rev (CT II), dated February 14, 1989. However, the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Abids Division, Hyderabad, on scrutiny of the assessment finalised by the Commercial Tax Officer vide his proceedings dated December 16, 1993 noticed that the appellant after purchasing chillies, paddy and sunflower from unregistered dealers, sold those goods as "certified and truthfully labelled seeds" and on that basis claimed exemption in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 604 Rev (S), dated April 9, 1981. He, therefore, proceeded to revise the assessment order and proposed to tax on those items as the appellant effected purchase from unregistered dealers and therefore they are liable to tax as first purchasers within the State of Andhra Pradesh. Before the Deputy Commissioner (CT), the appellant contended that they are entitled to e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... He, therefore, proceeded to revise the assessment order and proposed to tax on those items as the appellant effected purchase from unregistered dealers and therefore they are liable to tax as first purchasers within the State of Andhra Pradesh. Before the Deputy Commissioner (CT), the appellant contended that they are entitled to exemption in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 604 dated April 9, 1981 treating the seeds as truthfully labelled and certified seeds. In support of their contention, they have also placed reliance on the decision in the case of Gururaj Seeds (Pvt.) Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1994] 18 APSTJ 46 (2). The Deputy Commissioner (CT), disallowed the claim of the appellant and revised the assessment order framed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda, Hyderabad. Then the matter was carried before the Tribunal by the appellant. The Tribunal opining that in order to claim exemption in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 604 dated April 9, 1981, the claimant should establish and prove that the seeds in question are certified seeds as well as truthfully labelled seeds and that the appellant-dealer has 1. Reported [2002] 125 STC 387. 2. Decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been processed, treated with fungicides and packed by us using packing material and sold under our brand name of 'Shakthi' as truthfully labelled seeds. Moreover the said seeds were meant for agricultural purpose only and not for food, feed or oil purpose, since failed to adduce any satisfactory material and evidence to establish these two conditions for grant of exemption in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 604, dismissed the appeal by its order dated March 13, 2000. The order of the Tribunal was challenged before the High Court by a revision petition on the ground that the view taken by the Tribunal that both the conditions should co-exist for getting exemption under G.O. Ms. No. 604 is on a misreading of the G.O. Ms. The Tribunal's view completely ignores the clarification issued by the Government vide its Memorandum No. 13630/ CT-II(2)/89-19, dated April 26, 1994. By the said office memorandum, the Government had directed the Commercial Tax Departmental Authorities to note that both the certified seeds and/or truthfully labelled seeds are entitled for exemption from tax in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 604 dated April 9, 1981. In that context, it was submitted that the department could not have r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... trade of commerce-Exemption from CST." The Clarification Memorandum No. 13630/CT-II(2)/89-19 dated April 26, 1994 reads as follows: "In the G.O. Ms. No. 604 Revenue (s) Department dated April 9, 1981, the Government issued orders exempting from the tax payable under the A.P.G.S.T. Act the sales or purchases of all varieties of certified and truthfully labelled seeds for agricultural purposes. In the G.O. second read above, a similar order was issued under the C.S.T. Act in respect of the above goods sold in the course of inter-State trade also. The A.P. Seed Growers Merchants and Nurserymen Association, Hyderabad, National Seeds Corporation, New Delhi and Peddireddy Thimmareddy Farm Foundation, Hyderabad, have now represented to the Government that even though the exemption granted in the above G.Os. are applicable to both the categories of seeds, viz., certified seeds and/or truthfully labelled seeds some of the assessing authorities are insisting that the seeds should be certified as well as truthfully labelled to become eligible for grant of exemption. Hence they requested the Government to issue clarification in the matter to remove the ambiguity. The Governmen....