The State of Andhra Pradesh v. M/s. Automotive Manufactures Private Limited

Counsel for the Petitioner in all TREVCs: Mr. SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondent in all TREVCs: SRI P. KARTHIK RAMANA ...RESPONDENT The Court delivered the following: COMMON JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONIfURABLE SRIJUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA IIREVC Nos.220 .221. 225 &226 0F 2008 COMMO N JUDGMENT (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard M-. Swaroop Oorilla, leamed Special Starrding Counsel for the fitate Tax for the petitioner. Perused the recorrl'

2. These tax revision cases are filed by the State under Ser:tion 22 of the Andha Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (tbr short 'ttre Act') challt:ngirrg the orders dated 23.06'2008 passed b1 the Sales Tax App,:llate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, lIyderabad in T.A.Nos.98. 99, 101 & 100 of 2008 respectively.

3. The matters pertain to the lely of tax on spare parts used durin6; the warranty period. The tevy of tax, at the first instance, b.r thr: Government on these spare parts was hased on G.O.Mr;.No,1.44 dated 09.02.2008. However, the said Govemment Orier itself was struck down by the t{igh Cor.rrt in W.P.No.15i;48 of 2008, decided on 30.07.2008. Ptrrsuant t'c the striking dorvn cf G.O.Ms.No.144 dated 09.02.2008 by the High 2 Court and making the lery oftax on spare parts only prospective, the Government has subsequently issued memo i.e., Memo No.25 157 dated 24.02.2009 wherein the Govemment had held as under in the light of the aforesaid developments that have taken place: "Therefore, after careful examination of the matter the Government have decided to waive the demands raised retrospectively. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes is therefore, requested to send proposal for waiver of demands, if any raised, with retrospective effept. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes is also directed not to enforce collection of such demands raised".

4. In the light of the said Govemment Memo that has been issued by the Government waiving off the demands raised with retrospective effect, these four lax revision cases have been rendered only of academic interest.

5. Therefore, affirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer as also the order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, the tax revision cases stand closed at this juncture in the light of the Memo dated 24.02.2009, making it clear that there shall be no recovery of tax made for those assessment orders 3 that were undt:r challenge in these tax revlsron cases' 'Ihere sh all be no order as to c')sts. Consequent 1', miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' strall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/-K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR \ I SECTION OFFICER if any)

1. The Sales Tax Aplellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (urith records z ii. ippetrat€) Deputy Commissioner (CT) Secunderabac Divisron i rn" C!.r"r:ial i'ai officer, R P Road, secunderabad 4, one CC to M.. Srn,aroop oo'irr", Special Standing Couns,el for th€ State Tax s 5n"-rc to Sri P. l(arthik Ramana, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies PIp/PSL o loPUCl \ To, I I HIGH COURT DATED:1710212025 A7 -).- c/' '' ,, ., 'a ' $ a .s r{r \ \ \f')., -t - :1 Hf)il-r1 COMMON JUDGMENT TREVC.Nos.220, 221,225 & 226 of 2008 CLOSING ALL THE TAX REVISION CASES ,{-