Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, T.C.D.SEKHAR
Helix Energy Solutions Group Inc. – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer Kakainada – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner engaged in offshore pipeline construction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner challenges the tax assessment procedure. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondent argues lack of adequate account records. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. clarification on account maintenance regulations. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. court remands case for complete record submission. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 6. court discusses jurisdiction over transactions in territorial waters. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. implications of legislative power over territorial waters. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 8. court sets aside prior assessments and remands for reassessment. (Para 25 , 26) |
ORDER :
R. Raghunandan Rao, J.
The petitioner is a company incorporated in the United States of America. It had entered into a sub-sea constructions and diving contract, dated 21.12.2006 with M/s. Allseas Marine Contractors S.A, for on off shore Gas field, developed by M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, in the Krishna Godavari Basin situated in the Bay of Bengal. The contract awarded to the petitioner, was for laying a pipeline on the ocean floor, including installation of various sub-sea constructions like suction pipes, manifolds, Christmas trees, r
The court ruled that tax assessments must be based on complete documentation, and jurisdictional questions regarding applicability beyond territorial waters remain open.
The petitioner's appeal against the Assessment Order under sec. 23(4) of the MVAT Act was dismissed by the Court on the grounds of the availability of an alternative remedy and the presence of disput....
The court established that the turnover of sub-contractors does not add to the main contractor's turnover, affirming the single deemed sale principle and preventing double taxation under the Andhra P....
Assessment orders issued beyond the three-year limit under Section 24(5) of the PVAT Act, 2007 are invalid; powder coating activities constitute a works contract subject to taxation.
The court ruled that GST does not apply to services executed outside India's territory, affirming that the taxpayer's activities in Maldives constituted a fixed establishment subject to local laws.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
