2026 (1) TMI 1655

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;the Tribunal') in TA.No.113/02 and 115/02 along with another appeal TA.No.114/02. The period of assessment involved in the instant revision cases is 1996-97 and 1998-99, respectively, however, there is no challenge made against the orders in TA.No.114/2002. 2. Since, both the revision cases are filed by the very same assessee for two assessment years and as common questions of fact and law arise for consideration, they are heard analogously and disposed of by this common order. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/assessee is a dealer in lubricating oils at New Osmangunj, Hyderabad and apart from that, the petitioner also purchases lubricatng oils in bulk quantity from registered dealers within the State, prepar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... several substantial questions of law were raised, the instant revisions were admitted to consider the following substantial question of law: "Whether the use of the name 'Vicrocil Oils' and the image of 'Vicrocil' on the packaging of lubricating oil amounts to sale under a trademark as contemplated under Section 5AA of the APGST Act?" 9. Heard Sri Venkatramreddy Mantur, learned counsel for the petitioner/assessee, and Sri Chaitanya Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, and perused the material available on record. 10. The short point for consideration is whether the sale of lubricating oil purchased in bulk quantity from registered dealers and sold after packing into smaller quanti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... which clearly attracts the deeming provision under Section 5AA of the Act, thereby such sale is to be treated as the first sale for the purpose of levy of tax. 14. The contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the petitioner does not hold a registered trademark and hence cannot be treated as a first seller, does not merit consideration and untenable, in view of the deeming provision of Section 5AA. 15. The Tribunal has rightly placed reliance or the decision in M/s. Aditya Music, Hyderabad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh [(2003) 37 APSTJ 211] wherein the Hon'ble High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh, while interpreting the scope and object of Section 5AA of the Act, categorically held that the legisl....