TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 722
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') in T.A. No. 65 of 2000, decided on 07.03.2007. Vide the said impugned order, the Tribunal has affirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Punjugutta Division, Hyderabad, in R.R. No. 64/98-99, dated 02.12.1999. The Deputy Commissioner (CT) vide the said order dated 02.12.1999, had affirmed the order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer dated 12.09.1996. The assessment year involved in the present case is the year 1993-1994. 2. Heard Sri S. Suri Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Raji Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondent. 3. The brief facts which led to the filing of the present Tax Revision Case is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tract that was awarded to them was supplied by the contractee. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that they have participated in an NIT in respect of certain civil work of perennial nature. In other words, it was contended that the cement and steel used by the petitioner are in fact that which has been supplied by the establishment for which they were carrying out the contract i.e. M/s. Magunta Acqua Farms Ltd and M/s. SHAR, Sriharikota Advance Research Centre. 6. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the fact that the petitioner has been provided with cement and steel by the aforementioned two establishments i.e. M/s. Magunta Acqua Farms Ltd and M/s. SHAR, Sriharikota, therefore, it ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....M/s. SHAR, Sriharikota, must have purchased the goods from the local market and supplied the goods to the petitioner. Therefore, if at all, if the said goods have been purchased by M/s. SHAR, Sriharikota, and that by M/s. Mangoota Aqua Farms Limited, the liability of payment of tax also would be upon them alone and that it cannot be passed over to be paid by anybody else. 9. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the revisional authority and also the Tribunal both have erred in as much as ignoring the facts which were appreciated by the Assessing Authority while granting exemption. 10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Department opposing the case submits that there is hardly any scope left for this High Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... revision. So far as the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), it found that the value of the goods supplied by the contractees was being deducted from the consideration payable to the works executed. 13. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, it was repeatedly asked from the learned counsel for the petitioner to show that the amount of cement and steel which according to the petitioner has been supplied by the contractee had suffered tax in the hands of M/s. Magunta Acqua Farms Ltd and M/s. SHAR, Sriharikota, the learned counsel for the petitioner was not in a position to make any satisfactory explanation, nor he had accurate materials to substantiate the said contention. 14. The Tribunal also has reached to the speci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to introduction of Section 5F and Section 5E in the APGST Act. The ratio of the judgment is extracted below: "The Constitution of India has chosen to treat sales and deemed sales as belonging to one category (vide Clause 29-A) of Article 366) and they cannot be treated separately for the purpose of taxation after the definition of sale was amended by Act 18 of 1985. As the basic norm regulating the tax structure under the Act is confined to levy of tax at a single point. Levy of tax on a second sale in respect of goods which have already suffered tax is impermissible and therefore, a deemed sale likewise cannot be subjected to tax if the goods relatable to such deemed sale have already suffered tax. Same goods cannot be subjected t....