M/s.Maheshwari Par Boiled Modern Rice Mill vs When the matter is taken up for hearing, learne j counsel for the

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T CHAITANYA KIRAN, Asst. GP REPRESENTING SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondents: _ _ _ _ The Court made the following: ORDER I I I I IN THE HIGH COI,RT FIOR TIIE STATE OF TEI" \NGANA AT I{YDERABAI) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND TTIE HONOT'RABLE SRI JuSTICE ST'DDAL/\ CIIAI APATHI RAO Tax Revision Case No.2OI of 2O1O Date of Ordet z L7.12.2O25 BETWEEN: The State ofAndhra Pradesh M/s.Maheshwari Par Boiled Modern Rice Mill Vs. . Petitioner ...Respondent ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sn Jusfice P.SAtrf KOSIIT) When the matter is taken up for hearing, learne j counsel for the petitioner had informed the Court that the issue raist:, I in the present Tax Revision Case is squarely covered by the common rrder passed by this Division Bench in Tax Revision Case No.277 of 12 )09 and batch, dated 09.1O.2025.

2. This Court, having perused the record, is of the ,onsidered view that the issue raised in the present Tax Revision (l Lse is squarely covered by the common order passed by this Divisior Bench in Tax Revision Case No.277 of2OO9 and batch, dated 09.10.2125. Therefore, following the said order and for reasons alike, the instant Tax Revision\ .. Case also being devoid of merits, deserves I dismissed. No costs. * vr urEr rLS' oeserves to be and is accordingly

3. As a sequel, miscellaneous appll6alions pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/- R,KARTHIKEYAN JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFTCER To, J.l'l,"",,HlJST#llffi H#,:',"fiti#!ffj+,fl fl:#b8od,,tro,*,u , iffi%Jl"J;i:n'* at uvaeraoaJioun'"' "-'' '' ABK/ABK HIGH COURT DATED: ,.711212025 ORDER TREVC.No.20i of 2010 DISMISSING THE TREVC WITHOUT COSTS q"l,la" (.. 3 o ttB 2o2o C:.r i? .".. : S.SFATC\, .; -' - :=:=i- i' THE HONOT]RABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONO{JRABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATIII RAO TAX REVISION CASE Nos.277. 294. 295. 296- 298- 306 of 2009 and 16 18 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Jwtice P.Sam Koshy) Mr.T.Chaitanya Kiran, leamed Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr.Swaroop Oorilla, leamed Special Govemment Pleader for State Tax, appearing for the petitioner.

2. Since the question oflaw involved and the ground raised by the petitioner being the same in these Tax Revision Cases, they could have been considered and decided by way of this common order.

3. The instant are the Tax Revision Cases f,rled by the petitioner-State Government under Section 22 of Andfua Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the GST Act"). The challenge is to the order passed by leamed Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal") in T.A.Nos.L296, 1297, 1294, 1299 and 1593 of2004, 1041,208 and 1079 of2003, decided on 0 1 .06.2009, 04.05.2009, 02.06.2009 and 03.07. 2009 respectively.

4. Vide the impugned orders, the Tribunal had partly allowed the appeals preferred by the respondents-Assessees and partly -- 2 dismissed the same. There were two questions of .: w which stood decided by the Tribunal.

5. The present are the Tax Revision Cases wt ich have been filed assailing the only question of law which stood r ecided against the Revenue i.e. question No.l. The question No. decided was whether collection of sales Tax levied on Rural Dev ropment Cess component is enforceable in temrs of G.O.Ms.Nos 951 and 952, dared 10.09.2003.

6. For better understanding ofthe question rais3l by the State Govemment in the present Tax Revision Cases, it u ould be more appropriate if we refer to G.O.Ms.Nos.951 and 952 w rich for ready reference reproduced hereunder: 6' APGST Act. l957-Exemption from levy of sal s tax on the Rural Development Ccss component-Notificati,t r issued. (G.O.Ms.No.95l, Revenue (CT-II) Departmeng Dt.10.09.2003) NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers confened by sub secti, n (1) of Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax ,\ x, 1957 (Act VI of 1957), the Governor of Andhra Pradest hereby grants exemption from the levy of sales tax on th: Rural - paddy Development Cess component of the purchase value c by the Rice Millers, under the said Act. N.S.Harih: ran, Principal Secretary to Government. 3 (a) G.O.Ms.No.952, Revenue (CT-II) Dept., Dt.10.9.2003. "A.P.Rural Development Cess Ac! 1996- Waiver of demand relating to levy of Rural Development Cess on actual purchase prices paid by mill615 over and s[6ys ,inimum support price ofpaddy and also the outstanding arrears towards sales tax on Rural Development Cess component till date-Orders-Issued. ORDER: G demand relatine to Iew of RuraI Develooment Cess on ourchase Dnces Daldbvmillers over and above IIu mum suDDort price of paddv and also the outs arrears towards sales tax on Rural Develooment Cess comDonent of Purchase Value of y. till date (emphasis added). 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad is requested to take necessary action, accordingly. Padd (By order and in the name of Govemor of Andhra pradesh) Principal Secretary to Government.r, 7. A plain reading of two G.Os would emphatically make N.S. Hariharan, things clear that so far as G.O.Ms.No.95l, dated 10.09.2023 is concerned there was a clear exemption granted 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 10.09.2003. 4

8. Now coming to G.O.Ms.No .952, datd 10.0t,. 1003, a reading of the same again would make it emphatically cjr ar that by this G.O. the Govemment infact intended to waive .J e recovery of arrears towards sales tax on Rural Development O .ss component on the purchase value ofpaddy, till date i.e. the date on which it is published which in the instant case was 10.09.200:i This in other way me:ms the effect of G.O.Ms.NO.952 is grantin3 of exemption or waiver for the previous years also. It is this fact r1 lish has been taken note of by the Tribunal in the course of allowi r ; the revision petitions in favour of the assesses. There does not se:m to be any good ground raised by the State Government to r; ow that the finding so arrived at by the Tribunal is contrary to tlrr intention of the Government in the course of passing of aforesei i mentioned two G'os i.e. G.o.Ms.No.95r and g5z, dated 10.09.2'))3. No case has been made out by the State Government to sho.r that there were ary other G.Os. issued by the Govemment wit which the Govemment could have levied either sales tax or :ould have recovered the arrears of the sales tax on the Rural I) :velopment Cess component. Moreover, the said finding given by t re Tribunal is strictly aoaryzing two G.os which makes the finci rg of fact, 5 which gives minimal scope of interference under Section 22 of the GST Act. We do not find any case made calling for interference to the impugned orders.

9. All the Tax Revision Cases referred by the petitioner-State accordingly stand rejected and the question oflaw decided by the Tribunal stands affirmed. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. P.SAI\{ KOSHY, J ST'DDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J

09.t0.2025 Nvl

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T CHAITANYA KIRAN, Asst. GP REPRESENTING SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondents: _ _ _ _ The Court made the following: ORDER I I I I IN THE HIGH COI,RT FIOR TIIE STATE OF TEI" \NGANA AT I{YDERABAI) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND TTIE HONOT'RABLE SRI JuSTICE ST'DDAL/\ CIIAI APATHI RAO Tax Revision Case No.2OI of 2O1O Date of Ordet z L7.12.2O25 BETWEEN: The State ofAndhra Pradesh M/s.Maheshwari Par Boiled Modern Rice Mill Vs. . Petitioner ...Respondent ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sn Jusfice P.SAtrf KOSIIT) When the matter is taken up for hearing, learne j counsel for the petitioner had informed the Court that the issue raist:, I in the present Tax Revision Case is squarely covered by the common rrder passed by this Division Bench in Tax Revision Case No.277 of 12 )09 and batch, dated 09.1O.2025.

2. This Court, having perused the record, is of the ,onsidered view that the issue raised in the present Tax Revision (l Lse is squarely covered by the common order passed by this Divisior Bench in Tax Revision Case No.277 of2OO9 and batch, dated 09.10.2125. Therefore, following the said order and for reasons alike, the instant Tax Revision\ .. Case also being devoid of merits, deserves I dismissed. No costs. * vr urEr rLS' oeserves to be and is accordingly

3. As a sequel, miscellaneous appll6alions pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/- R,KARTHIKEYAN JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFTCER To, J.l'l,"",,HlJST#llffi H#,:',"fiti#!ffj+,fl fl:#b8od,,tro,*,u , iffi%Jl"J;i:n'* at uvaeraoaJioun'"' "-'' '' ABK/ABK HIGH COURT DATED: ,.711212025 ORDER TREVC.No.20i of 2010 DISMISSING THE TREVC WITHOUT COSTS q"l,la" (.. 3 o ttB 2o2o C:.r i? .".. : S.SFATC\, .; -' - :=:=i- i' THE HONOT]RABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONO{JRABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATIII RAO TAX REVISION CASE Nos.277. 294. 295. 296- 298- 306 of 2009 and 16 18 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Jwtice P.Sam Koshy) Mr.T.Chaitanya Kiran, leamed Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr.Swaroop Oorilla, leamed Special Govemment Pleader for State Tax, appearing for the petitioner.

2. Since the question oflaw involved and the ground raised by the petitioner being the same in these Tax Revision Cases, they could have been considered and decided by way of this common order.

3. The instant are the Tax Revision Cases f,rled by the petitioner-State Government under Section 22 of Andfua Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the GST Act"). The challenge is to the order passed by leamed Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal") in T.A.Nos.L296, 1297, 1294, 1299 and 1593 of2004, 1041,208 and 1079 of2003, decided on 0 1 .06.2009, 04.05.2009, 02.06.2009 and 03.07. 2009 respectively.

4. Vide the impugned orders, the Tribunal had partly allowed the appeals preferred by the respondents-Assessees and partly -- 2 dismissed the same. There were two questions of .: w which stood decided by the Tribunal.

5. The present are the Tax Revision Cases wt ich have been filed assailing the only question of law which stood r ecided against the Revenue i.e. question No.l. The question No. decided was whether collection of sales Tax levied on Rural Dev ropment Cess component is enforceable in temrs of G.O.Ms.Nos 951 and 952, dared 10.09.2003.

6. For better understanding ofthe question rais3l by the State Govemment in the present Tax Revision Cases, it u ould be more appropriate if we refer to G.O.Ms.Nos.951 and 952 w rich for ready reference reproduced hereunder: 6' APGST Act. l957-Exemption from levy of sal s tax on the Rural Development Ccss component-Notificati,t r issued. (G.O.Ms.No.95l, Revenue (CT-II) Departmeng Dt.10.09.2003) NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers confened by sub secti, n (1) of Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax ,\ x, 1957 (Act VI of 1957), the Governor of Andhra Pradest hereby grants exemption from the levy of sales tax on th: Rural - paddy Development Cess component of the purchase value c by the Rice Millers, under the said Act. N.S.Harih: ran, Principal Secretary to Government. 3 (a) G.O.Ms.No.952, Revenue (CT-II) Dept., Dt.10.9.2003. "A.P.Rural Development Cess Ac! 1996- Waiver of demand relating to levy of Rural Development Cess on actual purchase prices paid by mill615 over and s[6ys ,inimum support price ofpaddy and also the outstanding arrears towards sales tax on Rural Development Cess component till date-Orders-Issued. ORDER: G demand relatine to Iew of RuraI Develooment Cess on ourchase Dnces Daldbvmillers over and above IIu mum suDDort price of paddv and also the outs arrears towards sales tax on Rural Develooment Cess comDonent of Purchase Value of y. till date (emphasis added). 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad is requested to take necessary action, accordingly. Padd (By order and in the name of Govemor of Andhra pradesh) Principal Secretary to Government.r, 7. A plain reading of two G.Os would emphatically make N.S. Hariharan, things clear that so far as G.O.Ms.No.95l, dated 10.09.2023 is concerned there was a clear exemption granted 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 10.09.2003. 4

8. Now coming to G.O.Ms.No .952, datd 10.0t,. 1003, a reading of the same again would make it emphatically cjr ar that by this G.O. the Govemment infact intended to waive .J e recovery of arrears towards sales tax on Rural Development O .ss component on the purchase value ofpaddy, till date i.e. the date on which it is published which in the instant case was 10.09.200:i This in other way me:ms the effect of G.O.Ms.NO.952 is grantin3 of exemption or waiver for the previous years also. It is this fact r1 lish has been taken note of by the Tribunal in the course of allowi r ; the revision petitions in favour of the assesses. There does not se:m to be any good ground raised by the State Government to r; ow that the finding so arrived at by the Tribunal is contrary to tlrr intention of the Government in the course of passing of aforesei i mentioned two G'os i.e. G.o.Ms.No.95r and g5z, dated 10.09.2'))3. No case has been made out by the State Government to sho.r that there were ary other G.Os. issued by the Govemment wit which the Govemment could have levied either sales tax or :ould have recovered the arrears of the sales tax on the Rural I) :velopment Cess component. Moreover, the said finding given by t re Tribunal is strictly aoaryzing two G.os which makes the finci rg of fact, 5 which gives minimal scope of interference under Section 22 of the GST Act. We do not find any case made calling for interference to the impugned orders.

9. All the Tax Revision Cases referred by the petitioner-State accordingly stand rejected and the question oflaw decided by the Tribunal stands affirmed. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. P.SAI\{ KOSHY, J ST'DDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J

09.t0.2025 Nvl