M/S. Hindustan Agro Products LTD vs. The Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, following a previous order dated November 20, 2020, passed by a Division Bench in W.P.No.45971 of 2018. In that prior case, the Court had set aside the levy of GST on the value of by-products (broken rice, bran, and husk) when treated as part of the consideration for milling paddy. The reasoning was that such by-products should not be considered part of the consideration paid for milling services. The present writ petition was disposed of in terms of that earlier order. The operative direction was to allow the petition and set aside the impugned assessment order concerning the levy of GST on by-products.
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order dated May 18, 2019, passed by the 3rd respondent, which levied GST on customized milling and its by-products. The petitioner also contended that their objections filed on August 20, 2018, to the show cause notice were not properly considered. The petitioner sought to declare the order illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions and principles of natural justice. Alternatively, they requested the 4th respondent to bear the GST liability. The petitioner is the entity engaged in customized milling, and the respondents represent the GST and Civil Supplies authorities.
Key Issues
1. Whether the levy of GST on the customized milling and its by-products is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and the provisions of the APGST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the impugned order, passed by the 3rd respondent, is violative of the principles of natural justice due to the non-consideration of the petitioner's objections? The petitioner argued that the GST levy on customized milling and by-products was improper and that their objections were not adequately addressed, violating natural justice. The revenue, represented by respondents 1, 2, and 3, did not explicitly record arguments in the judgment. However, their implicit stance was to uphold the impugned order. The petitioner relied on constitutional provisions and the APGST Act, 2017.
Sections Cited
APGST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.RAVINDRA BABU
WRIT PETITION No.20244 OF 2019
ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar)
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…….. to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in passing the impugned Order No.GSTIN.37AAECR9431M1ZU/CGST on 18.05.2019 levying tax on the customized milling and the bye products thereon and also not considering the objections properly filed on 20.08.2018 by the Petitioner to the show cause notice as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and also provisions of APGST Act, 2017 and also violative of principles of natural justice or alternatively to direct the 4th respondent to pay the GST or bear the payment of GST and consequently to set aside the impugned order dated 18.05.2019 and pass ….”
Heard Sri B.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N. Harinath, learned Deputy
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.