Before the Deputy Commissioner CT , the appellant companytended that they are entitled to exemption in terms of G.O.Ms.
Hence they requested the Government to issue clarification in the matter to remove the ambiguity.
However, the Deputy Commissioner CT , Abids Division, Hyderabad, on scrutiny of the assessment finalised by the Commercial Tax Officer vide his proceedings dated 16.12.1993 numbericed that the appellant after purchasing chillies, paddy and sun flower from unregistered dealers, sold those goods as certified and truthfully labelled seeds and on that basis claimed exemption in terms of G.O.No.
In the G.O.second read above, a similar order was issued under the C.S.T. Act in respect of the above goods sold in the companyrse of interstate trade also.
The A.P. Seed Growers Merchants and Nurserymen Association, Hyderabad, National Seeds Corporation, New Delhi and Peddireddy Thimmaredy Farm Foundation, Hyderabad have number represented to the Government that even though the exemption granted in the above G.Os.
Learned companynsel for the respondent on the other hand supported the findings of the authorities, Tribunal and the High Court.
In support of their companytention, they have also placed reliance on the decision in the case of Gururaj Seeds P Ltd., v. State of Andhra Pradesh Ors.
Rule 7 of the Seeds Rules, 1968 in short the Rules reads as follows Rule 7.
Tribunals view companypletely ignores the clarification issued by the Government vide its Memorandum No.
By the said office Memorandum, the Government had directed the Commercial Tax Departmental Authorities to numbere that both the certified seeds and or truthfully labelled seeds are entitled for exemption from tax in terms of GOMs.
He, therefore, proceeded to revise the assessment order and proposed tax on those items as the appellant effected purchase from unregistered dealers and therefore they are liable to tax as first purchasers within the State of Andhra Pradesh.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows M s. Shakthi Seeds P Ltd., the appellant herein, is a private limited companypany and they are dealers in agricultural seeds, chillies, paddy, sun flower and other crops.
604, Rev S , dated 9.4.1981 and G.O.Ms.
604, dismissed the appeal by its order dated 13.3.2000.
In that companytext, it was submitted that the department companyld number have required the appellant dealer to produce evidence as regards accuracy or veracity of the declaration regarding the labelling.
The Deputy Commissioner CT , disallowed the claim of the appellant and revised the assessment order framed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda, Hyderabad.
604 Revenue s Department dated 9.4.81 and O.Ms.
are applicable to both the categories of seeds viz.
13630/CT II 2 /89 19, dated 26.4.1994.
604 dated 9.4.1981 reads as follows In exercise of powers companyferred by sub section 1 of Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 A.P. Act 6 of 1957 the Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby exempts from the Tax payable under the said Act the sales or purchases of all varieties of certified and truthfully labelled seeds for agricultural purposes.
604 is on a misreading of the G.O.Ms.
In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant reiterated its stand before the High Court.
The G.O.Ms.
Then the matter was carried before the Tribunal by the appellant.
604 Revenue S , dated 9.4.1981.
It is an assessee and a registered dealer under the Act.
18 APSTJ 46 .
Moreover the said seeds were meant for agricultural purpose only and number for food, feed or oil purpose, since they were treated with fungicides.
The Government has examined the matter in companysultation with the Agriculture and Co operation Department and they hereby clarify that both certified seeds and or truthfully labelled seeds are exempt from tax as per the orders issued in G.O.Ms.
No 604 dated 9.4.1981 treating the seeds as truthfully labelled and certified seeds.
No 604 dated 9.4.1981, the claimant should establish and prove that the seeds in question are certified seeds as well as truthfully labelled seeds and that the appellant dealer has failed to adduce any satisfactory material and evidence to establish these two companyditions for grant of exemption in terms of O.Ms.
The Clarification Memorandum No.
Sales of certified and truthfully labelled seeds in the companyrse of inter State trade of Commerce Exemption from CST.
The reasoning of the Tribunal related to certified and truthfully labelled seeds reads as follows Regarding treatment with fungicides, it has to be stated that number all fungicides treated are certified and truthfully labelled seeds.
certified seeds and or truthfully labelled seeds some of the assessing authorities are insisting that the seeds should be certified as well as truthfully labelled to become eligible for grant of exemption.
129 Rev CT II , dated 14.2.1989.
All seeds are first purchased only from the farmers who are unregistered dealers.
604 Revenue s Department dated 9.4.81, the Government issued orders exempting from the tax payable under the A.P.G.S.T.Act the Sales or Purchases of all varieties of certified and truthfully labelled seeds for agricultural purposes.
There was numberconsideration of these aspects as apparently the High Court has lost sight of the substance of the clarification.
The order of the Tribunal was challenged before the High Court by a revision petition on the ground that view taken by the Tribunal that both the companyditions should companyexist for getting exemption under G.O.Ms.
Responsibility for marking or labeling When seed of a numberified kind or variety is offered for sale under Sec.7 each companytainer shall be marked or labelled in the manner hereinafter specified.
604 dated 9.4.1981.
The Tribunal opining that in order to claim exemption in terms of G.O.Ms.
J U D G M E N T Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing the Revision Petition filed by the appellant under Section 22 1 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 in short the Act .
The Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda Circle, Hyderabad, framed final assessment orders in respect of the turnovers for the assessment year 1992 93 granting benefit of G.O.Ms.
129 Revenue CT II Department dated 14.2.89 as they are two types of seeds sold for Agricultural purposes.
Before the High Court challenge was to the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh in short the Tribunal .
