M/S. Lakshmi Priya Rice Mill vs. The Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes)

WP/19408/2019HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01040435201908 February 2021Bench: U.DURGA PRASAD RAO,J. UMA DEVI2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

Held

The Court allowed the writ petitions, following its previous order in W.P.No.45971 of 2018. The assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent, which levied GST on the value of by-products (broken rice, bran, and husk) by treating them as part of the consideration for custom milling of paddy, were set aside. The Court clarified that the petitioners would still be liable to pay tax on the sale of these by-products if they are statutorily taxable. The ratio decidendi is that by-products of custom milling, unless otherwise statutorily taxable, cannot be treated as part of the consideration for the primary service of milling for the purpose of GST levy. The operative direction was to set aside the impugned assessment orders.

Facts

These writ petitions were filed by multiple petitioners challenging assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent (authority levying GST). The core issue revolved around the levy of GST on the value of broken rice, bran, and husk, which were obtained by the petitioners as by-products from the custom milling of paddy. The petitioners argued that the matter was covered by a previous order of the High Court in W.P.No.45971 of 2018, dated 20.11.2020. The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, representing the respondents, did not dispute this assertion. The petitions were heard together.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment orders levying GST on the value of broken rice, bran, and husk obtained from custom milling of paddy are valid, considering the precedent set by this Court in W.P.No.45971 of 2018. (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The subject matter is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.45971 of 2018, dated 20.11.2020, and therefore, the same order should be applied to these petitions. Revenue's contention: The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax did not dispute the petitioners' submission that the matter was covered by the aforementioned High Court order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO AND HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI

WRIT PETITION Nos.11469, 11627, 11730, 15188, 18902, 19113, 19408 and 19462 of 2019

COMMON ORDER: (per UDPR,J)

These batch of writ petitions are filed challenging the assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent levying GST on the value of broken rice, bran and husk obtained by the petitioners on custom milling of the paddy.

2.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing on behalf of 1st respondent, Sri P.Hema Chandra, learned standing counsel representing on behalf of respondents 2 to 4 and learned Assistant Solicitor representing on behalf of 5th respondent.

3.

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioners would submit that the subject matter in these writ petitions is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.45971 of 2018, dated 20.11.2020 and the same order may be passed in these writ petitions also. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing on behalf of respondents has not disputed the said fact.

4.

Following th

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.

See plans and prices

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.