TREVC/126/2010 of THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY STATEREPRESENTATIVE BEFORE STAT, Vs M/S ASWINI HOMEO AND AYURVEDIC PRODUCTS LIMITED, HYD. on 15 December 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TVVENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTH?UDDAI,A CHALAPATHI RAO Tax Revision Case No.125 of 2010 Tax revision filed under Section 22(1) read with Rule L0 of APGST Rules, assailing the order dated 01..12.2008 passed in T.A.No.370 of.2O04 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad preferred against the order dated 09.12.2003 passed in Appeal No.R/285/2W3-2004 on the fite of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. Between: The State of A.P., rep. by State Representative before STAI Rep. by the State Representative before STAT, D.No. 54404to 408, Nampallp Hyderibad. ...Petitioner. AND M/ s.Aswini Homeo And Ayurvedic Road, Iv{oosapet, Hyderabad. Products Limited, 5-283/1,, Vajra House, H.P. Respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Dantu Srinivas ( SPL SC FOR CT) Counsei for the RespondenH -- The Court made the following: |UDGMENT:

I TN THE HII]H COURT FOR TIIE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY ANI) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATI{I RAO Tax Revision Casc No.t26 of 2010 Dated: 15.12.2025 Between The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep. by the St,ate Representative betbre STAT, D.No.5-4-404 to 408, Nampally, Andhra Prades,h, Hyderabad. . . . Petitioner AND M/s.Aswini H<lmeo & Ayurvedic Products Limited, 5-283 I l, Vajra House, HP Road, Moosapet, Hyclerabad. . . . Respondent (Per llon'blc Sri .lnticr P.Suru fuxhl, ) Heard Mr.T.Chaitanya Kiran, learncd Assistant Government P,eader represcnting Mr.Srvaroop Oorilla, learned Special Standing Counsel tbr the Srate -fa.x ltrr the petitioner. Perused the record.

2. The challenge in this tax revision case is to the order dated 01.12.2008 passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in T.A.No.370 of 2004.

3. The point for consideration before this Court is as to whether the product from the respondent organization viz., Aswini Hair Oil is a rnedicated product or not and whether the same would tall within the purview of Entry 37 of the First Schedule as a drug or whether it would go under Entry 36 as a cosmetic.

4. Perusal of the record would go to show that the Tribunal while deciding the said issue was swayed away by the judgment of this very High Court in Special Appeal Nos.8 and l0 of 2000 decided on 12.04.2007 wherein the High Court dealing with the issue whether it would be a product under Entry 36 or Entry 37 of the First Scheclule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (for short 'the Act') relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in B.P.L Plrurnruceuticals Limited vs. Collector of Central Excise, Vudodara reported in 104 STC 164 and another decision of tlre Supreme Court in Conttttissioner of Central Excisc vs. \-.\,

-r'

Sharma Chemical Works reported in 132 STC 25 I held that Aswani Horreo Hair Oil is a drug and is taxable under Entry 37 of First Schedule to the Act and would not fall under Entry 36.

5. There has been no material to show that the judgment rendered by this Court in Special Appeal Nos.8 and l0 of 2000 having been reversed subsequently to hold that the view taken by the Tribunal relying upon the High Court's order to be incorrect. Mor@ver, we are also not inclined to interfbre with the order for the reasbn that the issue already stands de,cided by this l{igh Curt again in a batch of tax revision cases of similar nature in TREVC Nos.l55 of 2004 and batch clecided on 14.0(r.2024 and also in TREVC No.66 of 2009 dated 17.02.2025.

6. Given the aforesaid judiciat precedents rendered in the recent past and also those which have been relied upon by the Tribunal while passing the irnpugned order, we do not lind any merits in the question of law raised by the State.

7. The tax revision case, being devoid ol'merits, tails and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, rniscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed

4. Two CD CoPies ]CK/kam w //rRuE coPY I / sd/-MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUfi REGISTRAR -/Cr SECTION OFFICER To, l.TheSalesTaxAppetlateTribunal,Andty3Pradesh,Hyderabad

2. The Appeirhtr""'"il'c;#;;i;""' (cq, Hyderabail Rural Division' ,. HS3at;tsri Danru srinivas ( sp,- sc FoR cr) toPuc, \ \ ) f / HIGH COURT DATED:I s / 12/ 2t)2s IUDGMENT: TREVC.No.126 of 2010 Dismissing the T.R.E.V.C. without costs t r$ s IHE tt ,, R c i * c.JP(eN G Y,* i-) -E *