ZEUS TECHNOLOGIES Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
SALES TAX TRIBUNAL
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
K. Ashok Babu, Chairman -
(2.) ASSAILING the order rendered by the Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling on 3.9.2011, the appellant has preferred the appeal on hand contending, inter alia, that except searching for the HSN Code numbers furnished by the appellant in IV Schedule to the Act, no exercise was done by the ld. Authority to determine the classification of 9 commodities which are entirely used in networking like LAN and no convincing reasons were assigned in support of the clarification which is erroneous and in as -much -as the HSN Codes, specified through the executive orders, have restricted the scope of operation of the entries contained in the Schedules to the Act, rendering the impugned clarification liable to be set aside as illegal, unjustifiable and contrary to the relevant entries in IV Schedule to the Act and earlier Advance Rulings.
Concise Statement of the Case:
The appellant is a dealer in business of trading in goods, which are entirely used in networking like LAN and approached the Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling u/s. 67 of the APVAT Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for issuing a clarification on classification of certain commodities traded by it, which are used as parts and accessories of computer systems. In response to it, the ld. Authority has clarified in A.R. Com/97/2009 on 3.9.2010 that all those 9 items of goods fall under any of the Entries under V Schedule to the Act and thus they are liable to tax @12.5% upto 14.1.2010 and @ 14.5% w.e.f. 15.1.2010. Aggrieved by such a clarification, the appellant has preferred the appeal on hand with the contentions as narrated in paragraph -1.
Relying on a decision of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in ESPI Industries & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer. Tarnaka Circle, Hyd. : (2007) 45 APSTJ 207) and a decision of the A.P. Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench in Asian Bio -Chemicals, Vijayawada Vs. State of A.P., (2009) 49 APSTJ 30), the ld. Counsel for the appellant has contended that description of HSN Codes for 8 categories by G.O. Ms. No. 1615, Revenue (CT -II) Dept. dt. 31.8.2005, having been in exercise of the powers conferred u/s. 76(2) of the Act, in order to remove difficulties, it cannot run contrary to the provisions of the Act, the ld. State Representative has tried to justify the impugned Advance Ruling as it is self -explanatory.
Point for Consideration:
(3.) WHETHER the order rendered by the ld. Authority for Clarification & Advance Ruling on 3.9.2010 clarifying that none of 9 specified commodities dealt with by the appellant fall under any of the entries under IV Schedule to the Act and thus they are liable to tax @ 12.5% upto 14.1.2010 and @ 14.5% thereafter under V Schedule, is sustainable or calls for any interference in this appeal?
Reasons for Decision:;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.