SAINT GOBAIN SEKURIT INDIA LTD. Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(ST)-2009-2-4
SALES TAX TRIBUNAL
Decided on February 06,2009

Saint Gobain Sekurit India Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

J. Shyam Sundar Rao, Chairman - (1.) THIS is an appeal filed against the orders of Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad in Appeal No. R/271/2002 -03, dated 24 -1 -2003. The appellant is M/s. Saint Gobain Sekurit India Limited, Kukatpally. It is on the rolls of Commercial Tax Officer, Hydernagar Circle. The Commercial Tax Officer passed final assessment order dated 26 -7 -2002 for the year 2000 -01 under the provisions of APGST Act. The Assessing Authority levied tax at 15% on the sales of wind screens and door glasses for different motor vehicles dealt by the appellant, treating it as Glass -ware falling under entry 18 of the Sixth Schedule. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. The Appellate Authority by his order dated 24 -1 -2003 partly dismissed and partly remanded the appeal, holding that the appellant effected sales of glass mirrors useful for automobiles. Entry 18 of the Sixth Schedule to the APGST Act indicates that glass and glassware includes mirrors. Hence, the assessing authority has quite correctly classified these products dealt by the appellant under Entry 18 of the Sixth Schedule. In fact, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner partly dismissed and partly remanded and however he observed that levy of tax at 15% on the Glass -mirrors dealt by the appellant is justifiable since Entry 18 of the Sixth Schedule to the Act indicates Glass and Glassware includes mirrors. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred.
(2.) IN the appeal grounds, it has been contended by the appellant as follows: The main business activity of the appellant is sale of wind screens and door glasses for different motor vehicles, which are only accessories to motor vehicles and they cannot be put to any other use. The appellant filed Tax audit reports showing that they are accessories to motor vehicles exigible to tax at 8% under Entry 1001 of the First Schedule to the APGST Act, 1957. The appellant collected at 7% in terms of GO.Ms. No. 625 for the sales of Windscreens and Glass -doors effected to APSRTC. The order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner is contrary to law. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner erred in holding that wind screens and door -glasses sold by the appellant are not accessories to motor -vehicles. The ADC ought to have appreciated that the Wind -screens and Door Glasses can be utilized only as accessories to motor -vehicles and cannot be put to any other use, justifying the inclusion of the wind screens and window -glasses under Entry 18 of the Sixth Schedule of the APGST Act. The Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts would also go to show that the goods in question are only accessories to motor vehicles falling under Entry 1 of the First Schedule of the Act and not glass or glassware falling under Entry No. 18 of the Sixth schedule. The Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the following judgments: 1) : 37 STC 378 (Supreme Court) 2) : 80 STC 233 (Supreme Court) 3) : 39 STC 8 (Supreme Court) 4) : 47 STC 359 (Supreme Court) 5) : 43 STC 480; 6) : 54 STC 83; 7) : 73 STC 120; 8) : 53 STC 429; 9) : 50 STC 19; 10) : 64 STC 382; 11) : 46 STC 470.
(3.) THE Appellate Deputy Commissioner having observed that the appellant had sold the products to automobile manufacturers would have observed that they are accessories to motor vehicles.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.