Telangana High Court
The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal vs M/S.Suchand Powergen P Limited on 19 June, 2025
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
TAX REVISION CASE No.57 of 2009
ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) The present Tax Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner-State under Section 22 (1) read with Rule 40 of the APGST Rules challenging the order, dated 20.10.2008 in Tribunal Appeal No.401 of 2008, passed by the learned Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (for short, 'the Tribunal') whereby the Tribunal has set aside the order passed by Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Hyderabad, dated 01.08.2007 and remanded the matter to Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Kurnool with a direction to examine the matter with reference to original LRs available with dealers and settle the issue. On remand, the Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal) vide order, dated 01.08.2007 set aside the order, dated 06.09.2003 passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) and confirmed the revision. Both the orders were affirmed by the learned Assistant 2 PSK,J&NNR,J TREVC_57_2009 Commissioner (CT), Large Tax Payer Unit, Kurnool Division, vide dated 10.06.2003 for the Assessment Year 2002-2003.
2. Heard Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, appearing for the petitioner- State and Ms.Aruna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
3. Having gone through the pleadings and upon hearing the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, what is reflected from the impugned order is that the Tribunal has decided the matter strictly relying upon the Judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of M/s.Sree Rayalaseema Alkalies & Allied Chemicals Limited., Hyderabad & others v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1.
4. On a plain reading of the order by itself clearly indicates that the State has not disputed the aspect that the matter is not covered by the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Rayalaseema's case (supra). The only contention was that the matter is pending before the 1 46 APSTJ 1 3 PSK,J&NNR,J TREVC_57_2009 Hon'ble Supreme Court where the State challenged the said order. However, there is no material made available on behalf of the petitioner to show that the matter is one which is not covered by judgment in Rayalaseema's case (supra) or any other judgment subsequently on the same issue.
5. In view of the said facts and circumstances, we do not find any strong case made out by the petitioner calling for interfere in the impugned order, dated 20.10.2008 passed by the Tribunal in Tribunal Appeal No.401 of 2008.
6. Accordingly, the Tax Revision Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this revision case shall stand closed.
_________________________________ JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY __________________________________________ JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Date: 19.06.2025 YVL/SHA