Sri Sambasiva Modern Rice Mill vs. Asst Commissioner Of Sate Tax
Held
The Court noted that the issue involved in this case was squarely covered by a previous order dated November 20, 2020, passed by a Division Bench of the same High Court in W.P.No.45971 of 2018. In that prior case, the assessment order impugned therein was set aside. Specifically, the Division Bench had held that the levy of GST on the value of by-products, namely broken rice, bran, and husk, treating them as part of the consideration paid to the petitioner for milling of paddy, was incorrect. Consequently, the assessment order to that extent was set aside. Following this precedent, the present writ petition was allowed in terms of the aforementioned order.
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order dated August 20, 2020, passed by the second respondent, which confirmed an order dated January 5, 2019, passed by the first respondent. These orders pertained to the tax period from July 2017 to June 2018 under the CGST/Andhra Pradesh SGST Act. The petitioner sought to quash these orders and declare that they are not liable to pay tax on broken bran and husk retained as by-products during paddy milling for the fifth respondent. Additionally, the petitioner sought a direction for the fifth respondent to pay GST at 5% on Custom Milled Rice charges of Rs. 15/- per quintal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is liable to pay GST on the value of broken bran and husk, which are retained as by-products in the course of milling paddy for the fifth respondent, under the CGST/Andhra Pradesh SGST Act. The petitioner argued that these by-products are not part of the consideration for milling services. The revenue's contention is not explicitly recorded, but the impugned orders suggest they considered these by-products as part of the consideration. 2. Whether the fifth respondent should be directed to pay GST at 5% on the value of Custom Milled Rice charges of Rs. 15/- per quintal. The judgment does not record specific arguments from either side on this issue, but it was part of the substantive relief sought by the petitioner.
Sections Cited
CGST/Andhra Pradesh SGST Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
W.P. No. 24375 of 2020
O R D E R:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar)
This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “….to issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the order of the 2nd respondent in Order No.ZH370820OD19874, dated 20.08.2020, confirming the orders passed by the 1st respondent dated 05.01.2019 passed for the tax period from July, 2017 to June, 2018 under the CGST/Andhra Pradesh SGST Act and declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay tax on the value of the broken bran and husk which are allowed to be retained, as by-products in the course of milling of the paddy for the 5th respondent and further direct the 5th respondent to pay GST @ 5% on the value of the Custom Milled Rice charges of Rs.15/- per quintal.”
Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record.
It is brought to the notice of this Court that the issued involved in this case is squarely covered by an order dated 20.11.2020 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.45971 of 2018 wh
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.