WP/2078/2026 of M/s. Hyderabad Bottling Company Private Limited Vs Commercial Tax Officer (CT) on 16 February 2026

1s447 | IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) IMONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY THE HONOURABLE SRI.IUSTilCDruNNSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITI ON NO: 2078 OF 2026 Between: firl/s Hyderabad Bottrino c.orqrly prrvate Lrmrted, rep by its rvranaging Director, [r,4 r Jasti Seshagiri Rao Ofi. ruo ab, ldn, A;t'r""g;ilHyd"rabad. 500 037 AND ...PET|T|ONER 1' commerciar rax officer (cr), (presen,y known as Assistant commrssioner (ST)), Srinagar Cotony Ciicte, pun;agutta'Oiuiiion Hyderabid

2. Commercial Tax Officer (CT), punjagutta Circle, Hyderabad

3. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), punjagutta Division Hyderabad. 4 Additional commissioner (cr), Legar (FAC), office of rhe commissioner ot Commercial Taxes, Nampally Hyddrabid. - " - 5' The commissioner of .co.mmerciar raxes 1st Froor. commerciar rax office, Near MJ Market Road, Opposite Gandhi Bhivan ttampatty, iyO"r"OrOlSOO

6 :tgl9 of Telangana.rep !V i1s Secretary to Governmenr (Revenue) CT_il, Commercial Taxes / State Tix Departmen(. Secretarrat, HyOeraOaJ "-' - '

7. State .of Telanglana, rep .by. its principal Secretary to Government, (Frnance and Planning), Secretaiiat, Hyoerabad ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constrtution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 6th and 7th Respondents to refund the amount of Rs 53,46,343/- due as per the orders passed by this Hon'ble court in TREVC

--- Nos250,2BO of 2009 and 89 of 2010, dated 15.2.2023 passed in favour of the Petitroner for the tax periods 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 along with applicable interest under Section 33-F of the APGST Act, 1957 from 15 8.2023 till date of refund a long wrth costs lA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petit cr under Section 151 CPC praylng that rn the circumstances stated rn the affrdavrt f led in sLrpport of the petilion, the High Court may be pleased to expedrte the hearing of the \Nrrt Petrtion as Respondents have delayed the refund for the past two years. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. P. AMARNATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 6: SRI T. CHAITANYA KIRAN, AGP REPRESENTING SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SRI MOHAMMED HUSSAIN, GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING The Court made the followitrg:ORDER

TN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OFTI]LANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDTKONDA W.P.No.2078 0F 2026 16.02.2026 Between M/s l lyderabad Bottling Company Private Limited' Rcp. by its Managing Director, Mr. Jasti Seshagiri Rao Pctitioner AND Commercial 1'ax Officer (CT), (Plesently known as Assistant Commissioner (S1'))' Srinagar Colony Circle, Punjagutta Division, Ilyderabad and 6 othcrs . . Respoudents ORDER (pcr l{on'blc Sri .Iusticc P Sam Koshv) Heard Mr.K.P.Amarnath Reddy, learned counsel tbr the petitioner, Mr. T.Chaitanya Kiran, leamed Assistaut Govcrntnent Pleader representing Mr. Swaroop Oorilta' learrred Special GovemmentPleaderfortheStateTaxforrespondentNos.Ito6 and Mr. Mohammed Hussain, leamed Govemment Pleader for Finance and Planning for respondent No'7' Perused the record'

\t- l. Ihc nratter pcnains to the pelitioner's claim fbl refund under th.' .,\rrrlhla I'nrclcsh (ieneral Salcs Tar Act, 1957 (tbr short rcrle:rsc lhc l)a\ nlcnl ol'r'clitnd 'tlrc \l)( iS'l \ct') I'he claim fol rclilnd liuctified in lavour ol- thc l)ctitione I on li.0l.l()1.1. lhe petitioner ri,aited lor a statut()r\ six rn()nllrs Pcriotl ri itlrin $lrich the dcpartntent ought to had nradc the rc lirnd. I lorr.'r tr'. r.r,hcn it was not donc lor almost tu,o and half -veu|s. thc pctilioDcr rvas cornpelled to frle the present writ petition Ibr- rrn u1.rpropriirtc \vlit ol'Mandarnus directing the respondents tci -1. ( )n tlrc prcvious date ol hearing, the leamed Assistant (ior clnnte nt I'lcuder lirr thc State Tax as also the leamed Assistant Cior crnnrcnt l'lcudcr lor I itrance and Planning sought tbr a rreeks' tinrc in asccrLairrirrrl tlre, paymcnt of refund to be rnade to thc l)e I tl l()r)c I

4. I oclitl . t ht'n the mattel' is taken up for hearing, Mr'. \,lolrarrrnrcd llLrssairr. lcanred Govemnrent Pleader for Finance and I'lanning inlbrrns the Court that in this case, the token for relcasc crl' rclirnd was already issued in the year 2024 and appropriate steps have been taken to ensure that the relund is crcdited to thc account of the petitioner todaf i.e. 16-02.2026. He has also brought the rcport receivcd through WhatsApp lrorrr the Financc Departnient where the refund has alreadv becn proccssed and in all like lihood, it would be credited to the accourlt o1'the pctitioner during the course of the day.

5. Ho'r.ver cr. what is reflected is that the alnount ol rctuncl relcased is only the plincipal arrount ol Rs.53,46,343/- ri hcreas in ternrs of tlre statute goveming the ficld i.e., Section -il I of the APGST Act, the Petitioner would bc entitled to interest or) thc delayed payment of refund at the rate of I% pel month i.e.. l20h per annum tbr which there is no requireurent of artl acl.judication separately required for the release of thc samc attd thc said computation of interest component also has to be done by' thc departmcnt along with the steps taken for release ol the principal artlount itself. I-Iowever, there does not seetn to be ally good ground available with the respondents for not doing SO simultaneously when proceedings were drawn to release the pLincipal amount. Since the statute provides for payrnent of interest on thc dL-la\':',1 l'cleasirrs ol- refirnd, \Ve SL'e nO reason r,',hr tlrc pctitione r shorrld ire denicd the intcrest rvhich is otherwise calcr,rlntion ol'irrrclcsr on thc prirrcipal anroulrr of Rs.53,46,343/- is Protcclr'd rrnder 1lt,: stutiite. itsell. \\ c d() n()t intcnd to keep the writ pctition penrlirrr. onl', on this cor.rnl. We lrrc inclined to disposc of thc rilit pc:titron rr itlr rr clirectiot) t() tho respondents so thr as conccrued liorn I 5.0li.l0ll i.c.. liorr the diite ot'conrpletion of six pcriod ol trro untl halI r crrs er:tctlr nrontlrs period tirrrn l5.0l l0l3 till toclav i.e., I6.02.2026 i.e., fbr a

6. I.r't thc conrprrtation be donc forthwith and the entire interest arrount pavable hc also lclcased to thc petitiouer within a pcriod of trvo u,ct,ks. lhe ulirresuid rlircction o1'pavntcnt ol-intcrest has to be donc u itliin l pcriorl t'l tri o u,ccks lirr thc. reason tllat it ought to had bccn dorrc lrt thc respondents sitnultancously rvith the principal anroLult itscll'rr hich u,rrs bcirrg pr-ocessed firr refund. Thus, the act on thc part ol thc resporrdents in not releasing the interest Ttrinta /ic'iL, appears ttt bc deliberate act on thejr pafi, more particularly ivhcn the sti,ttutc undcr Section i3F of thc APGST Act clcarlv rnandates in this legard. We make it clear that in case if the

--a aforesaidamountisnotprocessedandpaidbybothbythe depaflnrents concerncd i'e', Commercial -fax Departlnent as also by tl're Firrancc l)cpaftment within a peliod ol' l5 days granted by this Court.theentireamountshallturthercanyintcrestofl8o%per annutrr lrom 16.02.2026 onwards till it is actually paid and the said interest cornponent rvhich accrues beyond 16 '02'2023 shall be recovcrable tiom thc otficer concemed in the department who tails to cornply with thc directions within 15 days' l'he said amourlt, undcr no circulrstances' shall be borne by the State exchcquer The wLit petition is, accordingly, disposed of' There shall be no orcler as to costs. Conscquently, rr iscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall . JAVTAHAR REDDY STANT REGISTRAR To stand closed SD/-M //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The Commercial Tax Officer (CT), known as Assistant tta Division, HYderabad ' (Presentl Commissto ner (ST)), Srinagar Colony Circle, Punjagu 2'TheCommercialTaxofficer(CT),PunjaguttaCircle,Hyderabad.

3. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT)' Puniagutta Division' Hyderabad 4 The Additional commtssioner (cr)' Legal (FAc) office of rhe commissioner " ;i'8fi;;;;iri iir"i NamparrY HYderabad' 5 The Commissioner of ,Commercial Taxeg'-l"t Floor' rCommerfiiiJ3ir"Ji"fd " N;;r'il;i Marlet Road' opposite Gandhi Bhavan'

6 The Secretary to Government (Revenue) CT-ll',Commercial Taxes / State Tax Department, stat" oi t"i'"g';n; S""t"ttriat' Hyderabad'

The Pnncrpal Secretarv to lelangana secreta:rat.'Hyd"rcrob'u"Jn'unt' (Finance and Planning), state of B One CC to SRI K p Al\/ARNATH REDDy, Advocate topUCl 9 lwo CCs to SRt I;WAROOP OORILLA Specral Governmenr pleader for State lax Hrqh Co,rrt for rr.,e Stai-e-of'r"rrngill"ri,Hyderabad. [OUT] t t L-t:f "; i""nt ?Jtlft' n' n.." & Pla n n r ns H is h c ou rt for rhe State of reta nsa na 11 Two CD Copies 4,4 P oo I J

HIGH COURT / DATED:1610212026 RDER H

r- \ (.-) \, 'zli c ii q

+ +lls".^ i T I I WP.No.2078 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I 3l elaL ll