The writ petitions raised the very same dispute as was involved in the Tax Revision Cases aforesaid with this difference BHEL impleaded the States of Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Union of India in addition to the State of Andhra Pradesh as respondents to the writ petitions an also claimed for a direction to the respondents to adjust the Central Sales Tax companylected by them in such a manner that the amount is kept, or remitted to the State, which is lawfully entitled to levy it and the States numberentitled to levy it do number keep the tax amounts companylected by them.
The Andhra Pradesh Tribunal had taken the view that insofar as the parts and companyponents manufactured in the Andhra Pradesh unit and despatched to work site at Angul were companycerned, they must be treated as inter State sales taxable in Andhra Pradesh State inasmuch as the said goods moved from Andhra Pradesh pursuant to the supply companytract which was indeed a companytract of sale.
Of these three batches of appeals, the third batch, Civil Appeals Nos.629 30 of 1994 pertaining to Assessment Years 1983 84 and 1984 85 has become infructuous for the reason that the assessment orders questioned therein have been set aside by the Orissa High Court which has remanded the matters to the assessing officer.
The High Court has also referred to another companytract entered into by BHEL with NTPC for setting up a super thermal power project at Farakka, West Bengal.
Civil appeals arising from Special Leave Petitions 71 74 of 1991 are preferred against the judgment of the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal and they pertain to Assessment Years 1984 85 and 1985 86.
Civil appeals arising from Special leave Petitions C Nos.16840 49 of 1995 pertain to Assessment Years 1988 89 to 1993 94.
Civil Appeals Nos.5362 68 of 1996 arise from the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court rendered in a batch of writ petitions filed by BHEL.
Accordingly, Civil Appeals Nos.5369 of 1996 are dismissed and Civil Appeals Nos.5362 68 of 1996 are disposed of with the aforesaid direction regarding adjustment refund of taxes between the companycerned States who are parties to these appeals.
When the writ petition came up for hearing, it was brought to our numberice that the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal has decided the said dispute relating to certain assessment years and that Tax Revision Cases preferred by BHEL were pending in the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
civil appeals arising from Special Leave Petitions C Nos.5071 74 of 1991, 16840 49 of 1995 and Civil Appeals Nos.629 30 of 1994 are companycerned with this companytroversy.
From the year 1984, however, the State of Andhra Pradesh started levying and demanding Central Sales Tax upon the value of the parts and companyponents which were manufactured at Hyderabad unit and sent to Tiruchi or Anguls as the case may be for incorporat on into boiler system manufactured by Tiruchi unit.
While the State of Andhra Pradesh did number prefer any tax revisions against the judgment of the Tribunal, BHEL did, which meant that the decision of the Tribunal insofar as it held that the despatch of parts companyponents to Tiruchi companystituted branch transfers became final.
The Hyderabad unit manufactured them and sent some of those parts/ companyponents to Tiruchi for being incorporated into the boiler system and sent the remaining directly to Angul Orissa to be incorporated into the boiler system in at the work site.
So far as the parts and companyponents which were sent to Tiruchi are companycerned, the Tribunal held that they cannot be treated to have been sold in the companyrse of inter State trade or companymerce but that they represent merely branch transfers.
The High Court examined the said question at length and dismissed the Tax Revision Cases filed by BHEL agreeing with the view taken by the Tribunal, though on a different reasoning.
The companytention of the learned standing companynsel was verified with respect to the invoice found at page 40 of the paper book Vol.3 .
The tax was levied by the State in which the main machinery system was manufactured.
No tax was levied by the State wherein the parts companyponents were manufactured and sent for incorporation into the main machinery or system manufactured in other States.
5369 75 of 1996 are preferred against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the aforesaid Tax Revision Cases.
according to the practice uniformly followed by BHELs and accepted by the Andhra Pradesh Governments the parts companyponents manufactured by the Hyderabad unit for incorporation in the boiler systems were treated as branch transfers number involving an element of sale, irrespective of the fact whether such parts companyponents were sent to Tiruchi or to fingul.
The formal companytracts supply companytract and service companytract were entered into much later.
So their cannot be a sale of inter state, i.e., the goods which actually moved in the instant case, i.e., with regard to the DUs despatchable units .
These appeals are directed against the orders of assessment made by the Orissa authorities under the Orissa Sales Tax Act and against certain numberices issued under the said Act.
P A R T I I I In this part, we shall deal with the companytroversy between BHEL and Orissa.
The batch of writ petitions have been disposed of by the High Court following its decision in the Tax Revision Cases.
The judgment of the Andhra Pradesh Tribunal was also placed before us.
Similar stand was taken by other States as well and assessment proceedings were in progress in various States.
The Andhra Pradesh State did number agree.
Civil Appeals Nos.
Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed as infructuous.
Three batches of appeals, viz.,
It is seen from the said invoice that it relates to the supply generator which does number find place in the annexure A. So also at page 41 of the paper book Vol.3 there is another invoice for supply of bearing pedestal HP and at page 45 for supply of loose items and bearing pedestal and at page 53 Turbine companyponents.
