2025 (5) TMI 935

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itions and learned G.P. for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is a dealer in Gym Equipment and is registered under the A.P. Value Added Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner, was paying tax at the rate of 5% on the sale of goods, by classifying the goods sold by him under Entry-60 of Schedule-IV of the AP VAT Act. The petitioner had filed his returns, under the Central Sales Tax Act. The 5th respondent passed the assessments orders against the petitioner in relation to various assessment periods in the following manner. S.No Writ Petition No. Assessment Period Impugned Assessment Order 1. 7514 of 2020 2015 - 2016 A.O. No. 166188 dated 31-08-2019. 2 20411 of 2021 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed on any proper logic. Apart from this, the learned counsel for the petitioner would also rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, in Commercial Tax Revision No.12 of 2013, dated 11.03.2022, in the case of M/s. Bhatia Sports Company vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Uttarakhand. 5. The learned Government Pleader would contend that the equipment mentioned above, are general fitness equipment and do not relate to any specific sports. He would submit that the goods in Entry-60 would have to be the goods associated with a specific sport before they can be treated to be goods falling under that Entry. 6. Entry-60 of Schedule-IV to A.P. VAT Act, reads as follows: "Entry-60:-Sports goods excl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cipate in any physical sport. 11. We are fortified in this view by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, which had considered the question of categorization of similar goods. The Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand, following the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad, in the case of Cosco Industries Ltd., vs. State of U.P. & Ors., 2009 NTN (Vol.40), had held as follows: "5. Applying this principle to this case, we hold that Entry No.106 of Schedule II (B) provides for sports goods excluding apparels and footwear, and it is liable to tax @ 4%. Fitness exercises are also held to be goods relating to sports and games by the aforesaid judgment. The learned Tribunal, however,....