B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THREE identical contentions are raised in these two writ petitions, viz. , (i) that section 6-A of the A. P. General Sales Tax Act is unconstitutional and void; (ii) that the petitioners cannot be treated as "dealers" for the purpose of section 6-A; and (iii) even if the petitioners are not right in their first two contentions, still they are not liable to pay any sales tax on the material purchased by them, inasmuch as the material purchased by them is not consumed by them in the manufacture of other goods for sale, or otherwise, within the meaning of clause (a) in section 6-A. Learned counsel stated that all the three points are concluded by the decisions of this Court - the first two against the petitioners, and the third one in their favour. He brought to our notice that the constitutionality of section 6-A has been upheld by a Bench of this Court in Hindustan Milkfood Manufacturers Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1982] 51 STC 1, followed in Nandanam Construction Company v. Assistant Commissioner [1983] 53 STC 42. On the second question, the learned counsel submitted, the decision of the Bench in Nandanam Construction Company v. Assistant Commissio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document