Case Details: Sri Kodandarama Boiled and Raw Rice Mill Versus Assistant Commissioner (2025) 28 Centax 398 (A.P.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- R. Raghunandan Rao & Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, JJ.
- Shri Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, for the Petitioner.
- Shri P Hema Chandra, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioners, a group of rice millers in Andhra Pradesh, undertook milling of paddy supplied by the Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (APSCSCL) at a fixed conversion charge of ₹15 per quintal. As per the milling agreement, the petitioners were permitted to retain by-products such as husk, bran, and broken rice. The Revenue issued assessment orders under the CGST Act, 2017 and APGST Act, 2017, levying GST not only on the conversion charges but also on the estimated value of the retained by-products, treating them as part of consideration under Section 15. The petitioners filed writ petitions before the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, relying on an earlier Division Bench ruling which held that no GST was leviable on by-products retained in such arrangements. The Revenue argued that the earlier decision had no binding effect due to the absence of a stay from the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
High Court Held
The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court held that GST could not be levied on the estimated value of by-products retained by rice millers, reaffirming the Division Bench decision. It ruled that in the absence of any obligation to return the by-products or account for their value, such retention did not amount to additional consideration under Section 15 of the CGST/APGST Act, 2017. The Court rejected the Revenue’s argument regarding lack of stay, stating that the earlier judgment remained binding until set aside. Accordingly, the impugned assessment orders were quashed, and the writ petitions were allowed in favour of the petitioners.
