SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(AP) 1427

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : BILAL NAZKI, L.NARSIMHA REDDY, S.ANANDA REDDY
PANCHALINGAL CARBONIC GAS PVT.LTD., kurnool DISTRICT - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 11-26-04

Headnote:A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 - Manufacture - petitioner purchases carbon dioxide or oxygen in liquid form and converts into gaserous form for filling cylinders - Activity of petitioner not invoke process of manufacture.

       Held : Unless defined by the concerned statute, shall be taken to mean the process through which an altogether new product from the point of utility, marketability and commercial value is brought about. Mere change of form by itself, cannot be treated as process of manufacturing.

       In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the petitioners purchased, oxygen or carbon dioxide, as the case may be, in its liquid form, converted the same into gaseous form, filled it in cylinders, and supplied the same to the customers. The said gases are converted into liquid form by the original manufacturers only for the purpose of effective and safe transport to the bulk customers, such as the petitioners. The gases in their liquid form are, in no way different, when they are converted into gaseous form. The chemical properties and other characteristics of both are the same. In fact, before transformation into liquid form, it is in gaseous state only. In highly compressed state, and at a very low temperature, the gas assumes liquid form. Huge volume of gas can be transported or preserved in a relatively smaller container in liquid form. It is true that the conversion of gas from the liquid to gaseous state needs specific equipment and maintenance of different temperatures etc. This, however by itself, cannot be treated as a manufacturing process, as long as the product continues to hold the same characteristics. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioners were undertaking any manufacturing process.

       The activity of the petitioners does not involve the process of manufacture, irrespective of the difference as to the form, in which it is purchased by the industry, and the form in which the same is supplied to its customers.

S. ANANDA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners in these two writ petitions are small-scale industries. Initially, they were extended the benefit of deferment/tax holiday on sales-tax, under a scheme framed by the government of A. P. , known as target-2000 . However, the exemption was cancelled at a subsequent stage. The writ petitions are filed challenging the orders of cancellation.

( 2 ) DURING the course of healing of the writ petitions before a division bench, the petitioners relied upon the judgment in surya mineral waters, Somavarapadu v. The Commissioner of Industries, in support of their contention. The respondents on the other hand, resisted the contention, by placing reliance upon the judgment of another division bench of this court, in shv Energy South east Ltd. V. State Instrument Promotion Board. The division bench felt that there is conflict of views on the issue, and referred the matter to a full bench. That is how the writs are listed before this bench.

( 3 ) WITH a view to encourage the establishment of industries in this state, the government of A. P. , issued G. O. Ms. No. 108, industries and commerce department, dated 20-5-1996, providing for various incentives, for new industrial units, under the scheme known as target- 2000 (for short "the scheme" ). The incentives were made available only to those units, which are established outside the limits of municipal corporations of hyderabad, vijayawada and visakhapatnam. The incentives included 20% of the fixed capital investment subsidy, subject to a limit of Rs. 20. 00 lakhs, deferment/tax holiday on sales-tax, limited to 135% of the fixed capital investment, spread over a period of 14 years, etc. The schedule contained a list of 58 items of industries, which are ineligible for the incentives.

( 4 ) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 22680 of 2000, established a carbon dioxide bottling unit, in kurnool district, with an investment of Rs. 18. 66 lakhs. It was issued final eligibility certificate on 22-5-1997, in terms of the scheme. Its final eligibility was fixed at Rs. 25,19,100/ -. The nature of activity undertaken by it, comprises of purchasing carbon dioxide in its liquid form, converting the same into gaseous form, by pumping the same through a device, known as vaporizer, with aluminum fins. The carbon dioxide, in its gaseous form is filled into small cylinders and supplied to the customers.

( 5 ) THE commercial tax officer, circle ii, kurnool, the third respondent in that writ petition, issued notice, dated 7-8-2000, to the petitioner, stating that the commissioner of industries, through his orders, dated 17-5-2000, directed cancellation of sales-tax exemption, issued in favour of gas bottling units, and in that view of the matter, the petitioner is liable to pay sales-tax, with effect from 31-3-2000. He required the petitioner to pay a provisional tax of Rs. 1,76,240/ -.

( 6 ) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 13306 of 2004 established a small-scale industry of bottling of oxygen, in visakhapatnam district, with an investment of Rs. 57. 59 lakhs. It was also issued final eligibility certificate, dated 14-8-1996, in terms of the scheme. The activity undertaken by this petitioner is similar to that of the other writ petitioner, except that, the gas is oxygen. In their case, the commissioner of industries, issued a show-cause notice, dated 24-11 -2003, proposing to cancel the sale-tax exemption, granted to the petitioner. It filed W. P. No. 27232 of 2003, against the show-cause notice. The writ petition was disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner, to submit explanation. An explanation was submitted, and thereafter, an order of cancellation of the incentives, was passed. On the basis of that Order, the petitioner was required to remit a sum of Rs. 27,75,669/-, towards sales-tax payable from 31-3-2000.

( 7 ) THE petitioners contend that the industries established by them were found to be eligible, to be extended the benefit under the scheme, and once the final eligibi






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top