REPORTABLE

2026 INSC 195 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2557-2578 OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 6074 – 6095 of 2019]

M/S HAMDARD (WAKF) LABORATORIES … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, U.P. COMMERCIAL … RESPONDENT(S)

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2579 OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 16125 of 2022]

M/S HAMDARD (WAKF) LABORATORIES … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, U.P. COMMERCIAL … RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. The present batch of appeals arises out of the common judgment and order dated 02.07.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Hereinafter referred to as “the High Court” in Signature Not Verified SAPNA BISHT Date: 202S6.02a.25les / Trade Tax Revision Nos. 617 of 2012, 527 of 2015, 383 of 2017, 410 of Reason:

2017, 47 of 2018, 528 of 2015, 529 of 2015, 7 of 2018, 8 of 2018, 9 of 2018, 457 of 2012, 458 of 2012, 459 of 2012, 460 of 2012, 461 of 2012, 462 of 2012, 464 of 2012, 465 of 2012, 466 of 2012, 467 of 2012, 468 of 2012 and 469 of 2012, whereby the High Court dismissed the revisions preferred by the appellant and affirmed the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad, For short, “Tribunal” holding that the appellant’s product “Sharbat Rooh Afza” was liable to Sales Tax / Value Added Tax at the rate of 12.5% under the residuary entry contained in Schedule V of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, For short, “UPVAT Act”

2.1. The connected appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 03.08.2022 passed by the High Court in Sales / Trade Tax Revision Defective No. 38 of 2022, wherein the High Court, following its earlier judgment dated 02.07.2018 in the aforesaid revisions, dismissed the revision and held that the appellant’s product “Sharbat Rooh Afza” does not qualify as a fruit drink and is exigible to Value Added Tax at the rate of 12.5% under the residuary entry.

3. The dispute pertains to the period from 01.01.2008 to 31.03.2012. Since the issue involved in all these appeals is identical and the parties are the same, they were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

4. The appellant is the manufacturer of the product “Sharbat Rooh Afza which is a non-alcoholic sweetened beverage prepared from invert sugar and

blended with fruit juices, vegetable extracts and added flavours. According to the appellant, the fruit juice content in “Rooh Afza” is 10%. During the assessment years in question, the appellant manufactured and sold the said product and paid VAT at the rate of 4% on the sales thereof along with its monthly returns, treating the product as “Fruit Drink” or “Processed Fruit”

covered under Entry 103 of Part A of schedule II of the UPVAT Act.

4.1. The Joint Commissioner (Corporate Circle), Commercial Tax, Ghaziabad, For short, “the Assessing Authority”, however, made provisional assessments holding that “Sharbat Rooh Afza” was an unclassified item taxable at 12.5% under the residuary entry in Schedule V. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant preferred first appeals which were dismissed by the Additional Commercial (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Range, Ghaziabad, For short, “the Appellate Authority”. The second appeals before the Tribunal also came to be dismissed. Challenging the orders of the Tribunal, the appellant preferred revisions before the High Court. By the impugned judgments, the High Court dismissed the revisions and affirmed the concurrent findings of the authorities below. Hence, the appellant has preferred the present appeals before this court.

CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES

5. The learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the product “Sharbat Rooh Afza” is a non-alcoholic summer drink which has been consumed by the general public in India for several decades. It is manufactured

primarily from pineapple and orange juice blended in a specific formulation along with fruit extracts and herbs such as tarbooz, lemon, keora, gajar, m