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
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
46 APSTJ 1
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
