The State Of Andhra Pradesh v. M/S Rastriya Ispat Nigam Limited

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy and The Hon'ble Sri Justice M.S.K.Jaiswal Tax Revision Case No.85 of 2016 Date: 22.12.2016 Between:

The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by the State Representative Before AP VAT Appellate Tribunal Meghana Towers 4th floor, Opp.Gurudwara Bus stop, Visakhapatnam .. Petitioner and M/s.Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Visakhapatnam Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam .. Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner :

Mr.Suri Babu.S, Spl.Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes The Court made the following:

CVNR, J & MSKJ, J TREVC.No.85 of 2016 Dt: 22.12.2016 Order : (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) The issue decided by the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam (for short 'the Appellate Tribunal'), is whether supply of water by the Irrigation Department to the respondent constitutes sale and consequently, the same is exigible for Value Added Tax (VAT).

The Appellate Tribunal, while placing reliance on the judgments of this Court in the State of A.P. vs. Hindustan Shipyard Limited1 and M/s.Hindustan Shipyard Limited vs. State of A.P.,2 held that the contract in the instant case pertains to supply but not sale of water as what was sought to be recovered was only charges such as annuity on capital cost at 10% apportionable per year for 20 years, the interest charges @ 10% p.a., annual operation and maintenance charges @ 2% on capital cost, depreciation @ 1% on capital cost and that no cost or price attached to sale of water were found in the calculations. The learned Special Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioner- State has not disputed that the issues decided in the afore-mentioned two cases have been identical to that decided by the Appellate Tribunal in the instant case with the only difference 1 142 STC 460 2 38 APSTJ 189

CVNR, J & MSKJ, J TREVC.No.85 of 2016 Dt: 22.12.2016 that the supplier in those cases was Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation while supplier in the instant case is Irrigation Department. This difference not being material to distinguish two sets of cases, the Appellate Tribunal has rightly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent. Hence, we do not find any question of law arising in this Tax Revision Case for adjudication. For the reasons as above, the Tax Revision Case is dismissed. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) _______________ (M.S.K.Jaiswal, J) Dt: 22nd December, 2016 lur