IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 17th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO TAX REVISION CASE No.141 of 1998 BETWEEN: The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by the State Representative before Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, D.No.5-4-400 to 404, Nampally, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. … PETITIONER(S) AND M/s. Kona Elevators (India) Ltd. …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO T.R.E.V.C.NO.141 OF 1998 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) This tax revision case is filed by the State against the orders dated 22.12.1995 passed in T.A.No.677 of 1995 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Heard Sri A.V.Krishna Kaundinya, learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes, appearing for the petitioner, and Sri J.V.Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Perused the material available on record. The only question involved in this revision, as rightly pointed out by both the learned counsel, is whether the disputed transactions in the case relate to ‘works contract’ or falls within the definition of ‘sale’ of the lifts. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that the question involved in this tax revision case is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court reported in STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. KONE ELEVATORS (INDIA) LTD.[1] wherein, having regard to the nature of transactions in the appeal, it was held that those transactions would constitute ‘sale’ under entry 82 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, but not a ‘works contract’. However, after giving such finding, having noticed certain variations with regard to the ways and principles in other decisions of the Supreme Court, the matter was referred to a Constitution Bench. Therefore, having regard to the finding recorded by the Supreme Court which is binding on this Court under Article 141 of the Constitution of India, we have no other go but to allow the revision and set aside the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in T.A.No.677 of 1995 dated 22.12.1995 holding that the nature of the transactions therein amounts to ‘sale’. The Tax Revision Case is, accordingly, allowed. No costs. However, having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent and having regard to the importance to the question, especially where a Constitutional Bench is constituted, we deem it more appropriate to grant relief to the respondent to prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 132 r/w 134-A of the Constitution of India. It is needless to mention that in the event of any coercive steps being taken for recovery of the disputed tax, it is open for the respondent to take appropriate steps, since we find that it is a fit case to prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court. ______________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ____________________ (R.KANTHA RAO, J) 17th February 2010 CVRK [1] (2005) 140 STC 22