B. Chandra Kumar, Chairman - (1.) SINCE common arguments have been advanced in these appeals, the common judgment is being passed. The brief facts of the case are as follows: "T.A. No. 688/2000: - This appeal has been filed by M/s. Biological E. Limited, Hyderabad challenging the orders of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad in Appeal No. 787/95 -96, dated 15.04.2000. The assessment year is 1993 -94 (APGST). The assessing authority i.e., Commercial Tax Officer, Musheerabad Circle, Hyderabad has finally assessed the appellant by his order dated 15.03.1996. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Though the appellant has challenged the findings of the appellate authority on the following turnovers (i) on the sale of chemical plant Rs. 1,85,36,000/ -; (ii) sale of vehicles Rs. 19,500/ - and (iii) set off of tax disallowed for Rs. 14,75,758/ -, the learned counsel for the appellant has confined his arguments to the first item i.e., the turnover pertaining to the sale of chemical plant and machinery of Rs. 1,85,36,000/ -. Therefore, the findings on other turnovers of the appellate authority stands confirmed."
(2.) T .A. No. 97/2001: -The appellant M/s. APSEB, Khairtabad, Hyderabad (presently known as M/s. AP Transco) has filed this appeal challenging the orders of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad passed in Appeal No. P/89/2000 -2001, dated 30.11.2000. This appeal pertains to the assessment year 1996 -97 under the APGST Act. The disputed turnovers in this appeal are: "1) VAT sales of Electrical Meters for Rs. 250,80,052/ - 2) Material issued to the contractors Rs. 228,05,14,640/ -" Though the appellant has also challenged the following turnovers:
(3.) NO arguments have been advanced on these disputed turnovers. Therefore, the order of Appellate Authority stands confirmed on these turnovers. The appellant has filed a Petition in T.M.P. No. 112/2008 and disputed the levy of tax on the following turnovers: ;