THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA TREVC. Nos. 122, 124, 125 & 126 of 2004 COMMON ORDER:(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Vinod Kumar) Since the revision petitioner and the lis involved in all these revision cases is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this Common Order.

2. These Tax Revision Case are directed against the orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’), passed under the provisions of CST Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’). The case details are as follows:

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Special Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-State, in all the revisions, and perused the record.

4. The case of the revision petitioner is that it is a Government of India undertaking, manufacturing cement at its plant in Tandur, Ranga Reddy District, and is registered on the rolls of Commercial Tax Officer, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District.

5. Since the issue involved in all the revisions is one and the same, the discussion is made in relation to TREVC.No.125 of

2004.

TREVC.No.125 of 2004

6. The revision petitioner contends that during the assessment year 1992-93, it had received an order for supply of cement from Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board, Bangalore; that in order to comply with the aforesaid order, it had supplied the cement from its units situated at Yerraguntla of Cuddapah District and Tandur of Ranga Reddy District; that against the aforesaid supplies made by the revision petitioner from its aforementioned units, the recipient viz., Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board, Bangalore, had issued (03) C-Declaration Forms covering the supplies made by it from both the units; that the revision petitioner had submitted all the 3 C- Declaration Forms to its Assessing Authority at Yerraguntla and obtained certificate covering the supplies made from its Tandur Unit included in the C-Declaration forms submitted by the revision petitioner’s Yerraguntla Unit along with certified Xerox copies of all the C-Declaration forms; and that on the revision petitioner filing the aforesaid declarations, the Assessing Authority had granted the benefit of concessional rate of tax covering supplies made from Tandur Unit.

7. The petitioner further contends that the revisional authority in exercise of revisional powers, had revised the order of assessment, whereby the benefit of concessional rate of tax as extended on the basis of the Xerox copies of C-Declaration forms as certified by the Assessing Authority of the petitioner’s unit at Yerraguntla, was withdrawn and the turnover relating to interstate sales of cement to the tune of Rs.1,09,00,131/- was assessed to tax at higher rate, as not covered by declaration forms.

8. The revisional authority also further levied tax on HDPE woven sacks, in which the cement is packed and sold by the revision petitioner at the rate of tax applicable to cement.

9. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the revisional authority, the petitioner herein had filed appeal before the Tribunal vide TA.No.1022/1996.

10. The Tribunal, insofar as levy of tax on HDPE woven sacks(HDPE bags) at the rate of the contents i.e., cement is concerned, by applying the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Raj Sheel v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 had held that the conditions laid down by the Apex Court would apply insofar as sale of cement by the appellant is concerned and accordingly, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner in relation to levy of tax on HDPE Woven Sacks at the rate as applicable to the cement.

11. Insofar as interstate supplies of cement made to Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board, Bangalore, for which th