Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12058 (AP)

The State of Andhra Pradesh v. Venkata Krishna Agro Implements

TREVC/5/2022 · 2025-02-05

B Krishna Mohan, Nyapathy Vijay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010141122019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TAX REVISION CASE NO: 5/2022 Between: The State Of Andhra Pradesh Venkata Krishna Agro Implements Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY TAX REVISION CASE NO: 5/2022 The State Of Andhra Pradesh AND Venkata Krishna Agro Implements ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3516] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN NYAPATHY VIJAY ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT 2 HBKM,J & HVN,J TREVC.No.5 of 2022 The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the petitioner. 2. This tax revision case arises against the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam in T.A.No.343 of 2016, dated 27.09.2018, wherein, the contention of the appellant therein that Rotavator is to be treated as agricultural implement and covered by the said G.O. was not acceptable and the conclusion of the RA levying tax @ 8% at the point of first sale in the state on this item does not require any interference and thus the appeal was dismissed on that score, allowing in-part on the point of power tiller by dismissing the rest of the claim. 3. The present revision was filed contending that there is a disputed tax of Rs.1,46,863/-. 4. Since there is no question of law to be decided in this case, the Tax Revision Case is dismissed. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 05.02.2025 MDP