BharatTaxGST

M/S. Pepsico INDIA Holdings (P) LTD., Hyderabad. vs. State Of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

Original PDF →
TREVC/18/2008HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01053844200809 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA5 pages
For Petitioner: Sri M. pranavFor Respondent: Sri Swaroop Oo, DAY OF APRIL, ENry FIVE, ax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra, HYDERABAD., 7-201, Fathima, ...PETITIONER, efore STAT D.No. 5-4-404 to 408, ...RESPONDENT, illa, Special Govt. pleader for, ed to the office of the Advocate, PRESEN

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following ORDER: IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE TATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERA AD WEDNESDAY,THE NINT TWO THOUSAND AND Petition under Section 22 (1) ot A ( See Rule 46 ) to revise the Cjrder dt. 431 I 2007 on the file of the Sales Pradesh, Hyderabad . Between: M/s. PEPSICO INDIA HoLDINGS (P) LTD Complex Moosabpet. Hyderabad. AND iL1!"_{A*nl, Pradesh . Represented by S.R Nampally, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M. pranav Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Swaroop Oo DAY OF APRIL ENry FIVE ax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra HYDERABAD., 7-201, Fathima ...PETITIONER efore STAT D.No. 5-4-404 to 408 ...RESPONDENT illa, Special Govt. pleader for ed to the office of the Advocate PRESEN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUS ICE P,SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N SING RAO NANDIKONDA TAX REVISION CASE N : 18 OF 200I GST Act Under Section 3a (i ) 04-07-2007 passed in TA No. State Tax attac General Page I of 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Tax Revision Case No.18 of 2OO8

ORDER : (per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The instant Tax Revision Case has been filed by the appellant under Section 22(11 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 praying the Court to revise the order dated 04.O7.2OO7 in Tribunal Appeal No.431/2007 passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, at Hyderabad, (for short, 'the impugned order).

2.

Heard Mr.M. Pranav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Swaroop Orilla,.learned Special Government Pleader for Tax attached to the oflice of the learned Advocate General, for the respondent. 3, It has been brought to the notice of the Court that while filing the present Tax Revision Case inadvertently it has been shown to be liled by the petitioner-assessee. In fact, the order under challenge is that which stood decided in favour of the petitioner-assessee by the Tribunal, and therefore, the instant Tax Revision Case could have only beer-r hled by the State, i.e., the petitioner, ald the respondent herein would be the assessee.

4.

The point for consideratio whettrcr t}ae potato chips / wafe assessee would be liable to tax or 5. Mr.Swaroop Orilla, learned S Tax attached to the office of the the petitioner-State, submitted Uttara&hand, Dehradunl. Whil Iearned Division Bench has take decisions rendered by different Hi

conclusion that potato chip within the purview of processed ve to tax@ 4o/o.

6.

Relying on the above decisio in the case of Pepsico India Commercial (Al fV. Commerc potato chips / wafers would fall vegetable and is therefore liable to I 20 I I SCC Online Utt. 2626 [Commercial T 20.1O.2011I 2 2017 SCC Online Raj 43O1 !-. ,--'1 Page 2 o 3 t in the instant Revision rs s sold by the respondent / ecial Government Pleader for ed Advocate General, for at the issue arising in the ly covered by an order passed t Nainital in the case of M/s. e taxed only @ 4 o/o. Revision No.55 of 2011, dated s / u.ta 7. Therefore, in the light of the above decisions' viz'' I0[ls' Shriya Enterprises and Pepsico India Holdings P' Ltd" wherein a consistent view has been taken as regards the issue that potato chips / uLafers also would fall within the purview of processed vegetable ald is therefore liable to tax (Q 4o/o ' we are of the considered opinion that the instant Tax Revision Case filed by the State does not have any force to sustain' Therefore' the Revision fails and the same is accordingly dismissed' No costs' 8 As a consequence, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. ','J;-1'AJXtYl'iil ///I v= SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Telangana, Hyderabad (With records if any)

2.

OneCC to SRl. M. PRANAV, Advocate [OPUC]

3.

One CC to Special Govt. Pleader for State Tax, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. (OUT)

4.

Two CD Copies kul M/

I HIGH COURT DATED:O910412025 ORDER TREVC.No.18 of 2008 DISMISSING THE TREVC j 12 AUE z$zi -.:\ 1tr c S 147' { oA + (. !) .\ ,, -. 'l.q ),ir . .' 1 ,LD q b g

Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.