The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax Counsel for the Respondent :- TAX REVISION CASE NO: 295 OF 2009 Tax Revision Case under Section 22(1) Read with Rule '10 of APGST Rules under Section Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 01.06.2009 passed in Tribunal Appeal No. 129412004 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tricunal. Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Between: The State of A.P., Represented by the state Representative before STAT., D.No. 5-4-404 to 408, Nampally Hyderabad, ... Petitioner/Respondent AND M/S. Gunturu Seshavatharam And Company, Miryalaguda. Nalgonda District. ...RespondenUAppellant Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Kunuku Durga Prasad TAX REVISION CASE NO:296 OF 2009 Tax Revision Case under Section 22(1) Read with Rule 10 of APGST Rules under Section Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 04.05.2009 passed in Tribunal Appeal No. 104112003 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Between: The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the state Representative before STAT, D.No. 5-4-404 to408, Nampally Hyderabad. ... Petitioner/Respondent AND M/s. Sai Ram lndustries, R/o. Kalvacherla Village, Karimnagar District. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax ...RespondenUAppellant Counsel for the Respondent :- TAX REVISION CASE NO:298 OF 2009 Tax Revision Case under Section 22(1) Read with Rule 10 of APGST Rules under Section Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 04.05.2009 passed in Tribunal Appeal No. 208/2003 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the State Representative before STAT., D.No. 5-4-404 to 408, Nampally, Hyderabad. ... Petitioner/Res pondent AND M/s. Sri Satyanarayana Swamy Par Boiled, Modern Rice and G.N. Orl Mill, Kodad Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. ...RespondenUAppellant Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax Counsel for the Respondent :- TAX REVtst N CASE NO: 306 OF 2009 o Tax Revision Case under Section 22(1) Read with Rule 10 of ApGST Rules under Section ;\ndhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 02.06.2009 passed in Tribunal Appeal No.'1079/2003 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Between: The State 01'Andhra Pradesh, rep by the State Representative before STAT O/o.D.No.5-4-404-408, Nampatly, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. ... Petitioner/Respondent AND M/s. Vasavi F'ara Boilded lndustries, Madanapally ... RespondenUAppellant Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax Counsel for the Respondent :- TAX REVISION CASE NO: 16 oF 2010 Tax Revisicn Case under Section 22(1) Read with Rule 10 of ApGST Rules under Section Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 01.06.2009 passed in Tribunal Appeat No. 129912004 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribrunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by the State Representative before STAT O/o. D. No.5-4-a04 to 408, Nampally, Andhra pradesh, Hyderabad. ... Petitioner/Respondent AND M/s.Nandini Traders, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District. ...RespondenUAppellant Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax Counsel for the Respondents: TAX REVISION CASE NO: 18 OF 2O1O Tax Revision Case under Section 22(1) Read with Rule 10 of APGST Rules under Section Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 03.07.2009 passed in Tribunal Appeal No.1593/2004 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by the State Representative before STAT O/o.D.No.5-4-404 to 408, Nampally, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. ... Petitioner/Res pond ent AND M/s.Sri Kavitha Rice Mill, 23-40, Gaddiannaram, Saroor Nagar, Ranga Reddy District ... RespondenUAppellant Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. T. Chaitanya Kiran Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilla Special Government Pleader for State Tax Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following: TIII.I HONOT]RABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY ANT) THE HONIOURAI]LE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHAI,APATHI RAO TAX REVISION CASE Nos.277. 294. 295. 296. 98- 306 of2009 and 16. 18 of20l0 COMMON ORDER: (per l-bn'hle Sri.ht.stic'c P.Sont Ko.shy) Mr.-l'.Chaitan.v-a Kiran, leamed Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr.Swaroop Oorilla, lealned Special Government Pleader fbr State Tax, appearing fbr the petitioner.

2. Since the question of law involved and the ground raised by the petitioncr bcing the same in these Tax Revisiotr Cases, they could have lreen considered and decided by way of this colnmon

3. The instant are the Tax Revision Cases filed by the petitioner-State Government under Section 22 of Andhra Pradesh General Sal,:s -l-ax Act, 1957 (flor short "the GST Act"). The challenge is to the order passed by learned Sales 'tax Appetlate Tribunal (fbr short "the Tribunal") in T'.A.Nos.1296, 1297, 1294, 1299 and l5()3 of 2004, 1041, 208 and 1079 of 20.03, decided on 0 1.06.2009, (\4.05.2009, 02.06 .2009 and 03.07 .2009 respectively Jr Vide the irnpugned orders, the Tribunal had partly allowed the appeals preferred by the respondents-Assessees and partly I l 2 dismissed the same. There were two questions of law which stood decided by the Tribunal. 5 The present are the 'fax Revision Cases which have been filed assailing the only question of law rvhich stood decided against the Revenue i.e. question No.l. The question No.l decided was whether collection of sales Tax levied on Rural Development Cess component is enforceable in terms of G.O.Ms.Nos.95 | and 952, dated 10.09.2003. 5, For better understanding of the question raised by the State Government in the present l'ax Revision Cases, it would be more appropriate if,we refer to G.O.Ms.Nos.951 and 952 which for ready reference reproduced hereunder: * APGST Act. l957-Exemption from levy of sales tax on the Rural Development Cess component-Notification issued. (G.O.Ms.No.95l, Revenue (CT-II) Department, Dt.10.09.2003) NOTIFICATION ln exercise of the powers confencd by sub section (l) of Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (Act VI of 1957), the Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby grants exemption from the levy of sales tax on the . Rural Development Cess component of the purchase value of Paddy by the Rice Millers, under the said Act. N.S.Hariharan, Principal Secretary to Government. 3 (4) G.O.Ms.No.952, Revenue (CT-II) Dept., Dt.10.9.2003. "A.P.Rural Development Cess Act' 1996- Waiver of demand relating to levy of Rural Development Cess on actual purchasc prices paid by millers over and above minimunr srrpport price of paddy and also the outstanding arrears towards sales tax on Rural Development Cess component till date-Orders-Issued- ORDER: -!'he Government hereby- u'aive the outstsldllg ('ess on atins to levv of Rural Develoome demand lninillrum support price of padd-Y and also the Qq!.standing tax on cornnonent ol' Prrrchase Value of Padrlv _t!l! date. (ernp!asis added). 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad is requested to take neces:;ary action, accordingly. (By orclcr and in the name of Governor of Andhra I']radesh) N.S. Hariharan, Principal Secretary to Government." ?. A plain reading of two G.Os would emphatically make things clear that so far as G.O.Ms.No.9S1, datecl 10.09.2023 is concerned there was a clear exemption grantecl by the State Govemment from the levy of sales tax on the Rural Development Cess component on the purchase value of paddy by the rice millers which makes the effect and operation of G.Os. jurisdiction with effect from 1 0.09.2003. ,/ 4 I Now coming to G.O.Ms.No.952, dated 10.09.2003, a reading of the sarne again would make it emphatically clear that by this G.O. the Govemment infact intended to waive the recovery of arrears towards sales tax on Rural Development Cess component on the purchase value of paddy, till date i.e. the date on which it is published which in the instant case was 10.09.2003. This in other way means the effbct of G.O.Ms.NO.952 is granting of exemption or waiver for the previous years also. It is this fact which has been taken note of by the l'ribunal in the course of allowing the revision petitions in favour of the assesses. There does not seem to be any good ground raised by the State Government to show that the finding so arrived at by the Tribunal is contrary to the intention of the Government in the course of passing of aforesaid mentioned two G.Os i.e. G.O.Ms.No.95l and 952, dated 10.09.2003. No case has been made out by the State Government to show that there were any other G.Os. issued by the Government with which the Government could have levied either sales tax or could have recovered the arrears of the sales tax on the Rural Development Cess component. Moreover, the said finding given by the Tribunal is strictly analyzing two G.Os which makes the finding of fact, t \ 5 whiclr gives minimal scope of interference undet'Sr:ction 22 of the GSTAct. We do not find any case made calling lor interference to the impugned orders. q. All ihe -fax Revision Cases reflcn'ed by thc petitioner-State accordinglv stand rejected and the question of law' decided by the 'fribunal strlnds affi rmed. Consequently, rniscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closcrl SD/. N SRIHARI DEPUTY REGISTRAR I I I G //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. (With records)

2. Two CCs tr: the Special Public Prosecutor, State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, at Hyderabad (OUT)

3. One CC to Sri Kunuku Durga Prasad, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies DL/PSL *> HIGH COURT DATED:091101202s COMMON ORDER TREVC.Nos.27 ;, 294, 295, 296, 298, 306 of 2009 ancl 16, 18 of 2010 REJECTING THE TAX REVISION CASES J t -.7.". !i!-{. ! s; 2 5 ilotl 2ggl * *