ASTRAMICRO WAVE PRODUCTS LTD. Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
SALES TAX TRIBUNAL
Astramicro Wave Products Ltd.
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
K. Ashok Babu, Chairman -
(1.) THE only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether 35 listed electronic components, sub -systems and parts relating to wireless communication systems in RF & transmission frequencies for transmission, trans -receiver, receiver, etc., being manufactured by the appellant, do fall under Serial No. 39 of IV Schedule of the APVAT Act, 2005, exigible to tax @ 4%, as contended by the appellant or do they fall under V Schedule of the APVAT Act, 2005, exigible to tax @ 14.5% as clarified by the learned Authority? Undisputedly, the appellant is a manufacturer of parts relating to wireless communication systems in RF & transmission frequencies for space, defence and meteorology application (parts for transmission, transceiver, receiver) claiming to fall under HSN Code 8529). They have been running an Electronic Industry (IT Industry) producing electronic parts duly registered with the Electronics and Computer Software Export Promotion Council.
(2.) WHILE so, the appellant sought for an advance ruling from the Authority for Clarification & Advance Ruling in respect of the rate of VAT on 35 listed products being manufactured by them giving a detailed description of those products. However, the learned Authority had taken HSN Code portion and decided the rate of tax @ 14.5% under V Schedule of the AP VAT Act (herein after called as 'the Act'). Assailing such an order, the appellant has preferred the appeal on hand contending, inter alia, that HSN Codes having been revised subsequently, whereafter, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes had given a clarification in CCT's Ref. No. AIII(2)/7/2007 dated 4.7.2007, that, in essence, the description of the goods in the said entry prevails over HSN Codes and that had the description of the products been taken, the products, manufactured by the appellant do squarely fall under Entry (Serial) No. 39 of IV Schedule of the Act, and prayed for setting aside the Advance Ruling in -as -much -as the clarification relating to concessional rate, being in the nature of a beneficial legislation, must be interpreted liberally and the learned Authority for Clarification & Advance Ruling, having not appreciated the products in their correct perspective did commit an error in wrongly clarifying, and ruling that they do fall under V Schedule of the Act, exigible to tax @ 14.5% instead of clarifying, and ruling that they do fall under Entry (Serial) No. 39 of IV Schedule of the Act exigible to tax @ 4%.
(3.) DURING the pendency of the appeal, the appellants have filed voluminous additional evidence along with an affidavit in TMP No. 411/2011, which was allowed on 1.11.2011. The particulars of 35 listed products sold by the appellant, their functions and usage by various purchasers could be summarised as follows:
(Extracted from page one of additional evidence filed in a bound volume).;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.