2026-VIL-713-TEL

VAT High Court Cases

Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 - Levy of tax on blended coffee sold by Trade Mark Holder - Application of Section 5AA of APGST Act, 1957 - Appellant engaged in manufacturing and marketing of a product under its own trademark and brand name, purchasing raw materials from preceding points of sale which had already suffered tax. Appellant claimed exemption under Section 5 read with Entry 34A of the First Schedule to APGST Act, 1957 contending that the goods were entitled to exemption and that tax levied and collected at the preceding point of sale should be deducted from the tax payable at the subsequent point of sale - Whether Section 5AA can be applied to sales effected by a dealer marketing goods under a trademark or brand name at a point of sale other than the first point of sale, and whether tax at preceding points of sale is liable to be deducted from tax payable under Section 5AA, notwithstanding any express prohibition claimed in the provision itself regarding first sales – HELD - The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture and marketing of Blended Coffee by purchasing coffee seeds and chicory, subjecting the coffee seeds to the process of roasting and grinding and thereafter blending them with chicory before marketing the final product - A dealer who markets goods under a trademark or brand name at a point of sale other than the first point of sale is liable to tax under Section 5AA of the APGST Act, 1957 irrespective of whether the trademark is registered or unregistered. The statutory language of Section 5AA does not contain any express prohibition prohibiting its application to dealers engaged in manufacturing and sale of goods under a trademark. The provision operates by deeming such a dealer to be the first seller in the State when goods are sold at any point other than the actual first point of sale - The liability to tax under Section 5AA is attracted by the mere fact of marketing goods under a trademark or brand name, irrespective of trademark registration status. The Appellate Tribunal committed no error in confirming the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and the assessment made by the assessing authority – The Tax Revision Cases are dismissed and the impugned order is upheld

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page