TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 359
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ks manufactured and sold by the appellant fall under entry 32 of 1st Schedule to APGST Act? ii) Whether the S.T.A.T. is justified in setting aside the revisional orders made by the Deputy Commissioner? 2) So far as the second question being general in nature first question is one which is required to be considered. Assessee is a manufacturer of refractory bricks. It is the case of the petitioner as well as the authorities that the bricks that are being manufactured by the petitioner are of special and different category of bricks from that of the bricks which are used in the construction industry. Bricks manufactured by the petitioner have a specific purpose of utilizing the same in heat treatment furnaces and other furnaces such as kilns....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ough in ancient times bricks for the purpose of construction used to be made of clay and sand, the modern technology necessitated the use of other materials like concrete etc., in making bricks for the purpose of construction. But, whatever may be the material used and irrespective of the special design, the commodity remains bricks for the purpose of Entry 32 of the 1st Schedule if it is made for the purpose of construction and is used in the construction of structures like buildings, kilns, etc., It is not disputed that these fire bricks can be used even for the construction of rooms in a building or their inner lining in order to resist the heat which may be generated in the room. Thus, fire bricks are nothing but heat and fire resistant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....avodaya Ceramics & Pottery Manufacturing Industries Co-operative Society Limited, Tadikalapudi Vs. The State of A.P. 16 APSTJ 115. The Tribunal had held that the bricks would fall under Entry 32 of the 1st Schedule. A reference was also made by the Tribunal on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Advance Bricks Company Vs the Assessing Authority (1988) 6 APSTJ 51. Learned Special Government Pleader for Telangana, Sri Anil Kumar, by referring to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Advance Bricks Company case (2 supra) would submit that the Supreme Court had recognized the fact that sun-dried bricks are different from fire burnt bricks. He also draws the attention to that portion of the order of the Supreme Court wherein Sup....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g reliance on the judgments of the Supreme Court reported in Berger Paints India Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calcutta 2004 (3) SCC and Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-1 Vs. Bal Pharma Limited, Bangalore And others 2011 (2) SCC 620 , he submits that it is impermissible for the revenue to contend otherwise and as such the revision would not be maintainable when the facts are identical. 6) Having considered the rival submissions both the parties we are in agreement with the learned Special Government Pleader for Taxes (Telangana), Sri Anila Kumar, so far as the aspect that there are two distinct categories of bricks; (1) the bricks which are used in the construction industry and others (2) which are specifically used....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dried bricks are bricks of a class and both varieties of bricks can to a considerable extent be used for the same purpose as substitute of one another. As the term brick covers both sun-dried ad over- baked bricks, and there is no definition in the Act, the contention of the appellant that sun-dried bricks are a class of brick to which the notification under Section 18 applies cannot be thrown out as wrong. 7) However, taking into consideration of the huge variation in the prices of the sun-dried bricks to that of the fire burnt bricks, Supreme Court suggested, the authorities may take steps for making suitable modification in the entry. In other words, notwithstanding the fact, the Supreme Court had accepted there re sun-dried bricks and ....