•N8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR W.P. N0. ^^ 2002 Reliance Telecom Ltd. 2"d Floor, Ravi Bhawan Raipur Represented by Shri B.K. Singh S IQ & ^ • <s-lr^ R&^,;'^iit-- C-'^Z, Z. Flot^ , Sy-ii^o 6>^ a^ . ^at^u^ Authorised signatory 3 - Petitioners Versus •"\. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Commercial Tax Department Raipur i2. Assistant Commissioher Commercial Tax, Raipur lercial Tax Officer f^<.A'0^ ltec'^' Q- <>(ec?I'..-^'T '^UA ""'^ '-J^ Circle I, Raipur ... Respondents ;;l i! »' I^L^^I;SI? Vs. Reliance Teiecom Ltd. State of Chhattisgarh & Anothei 'acipn,4.. Sl. Shri Ashish Shrivastava ana' Shri Akhilesh Dalpati, Advocates for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, Deputy Advocate General for the State. (Passedon 05.10.2010) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Chaiienge In this petition is to the notice dated 08.03.2002 (Annexure P-1) and the demand notice dated 12.08.2002 (P-4A). Shri Shrivastava, learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not liable to pay sales tax under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Commereial Tax Act, 1994, for suppiy of SIM card, activation and recharging, as sale price of joods. Learned counsel further submits that the Supreme Coun in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And Another v. Un'ion of india and Others observed that the goods in telecommunication are limited to. the handsets supplied by the service provider for the purpose under Article 366 (29-A) (d) ofthe Constitution. Thus, the (2006) 3 SCC 1 E.^-2aS'^:^^l^^--: ^^s •ss-'?^^1^i???s ^ charges on SIIVi card, activation and recharging do not within the purview of sale price of the goods. 4. At this juncture, Shri Kachhawaha, learned counse! appearing for the State, submits that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (supra), the assessinc iuthority of ths Government may be granted liberty to reexamine/re-asses the entire matter and pass order, in accordance with law as laid dovi/n by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case. 5. Thus, the assessing proceedings as wel! as the impugned notices are quashed reserving liberty to the assessing authority to and asses the case in the light of above stated decision, f^^y fflii In the result, the petition is allowed to the above extent. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge <^;??u^i .*:§!££;-?F;' .^..s'^'^" w