IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE

SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

TREVC No.282 of 2010

Dated: 18.12.2025

Between:

M/s.Nizam Club,

5-9-5, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

…Petitioner

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the SR before STAT,

II Floor, CCT Complex,

Opp. Chenetha Bhavan, Nampally,

Hyderabad – 500 001.

…Respondent

ORDER : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr.S.R.R.Viswanath, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr.T.Chaitanya Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr.Swaroop Oorilla, learned

Special Government Pleader for State Tax. Perused the record.

2. The instant is the Tax Revision Case which has been filed assailing the order dated 05.07.2010 in T.A.No.159 of 2010 passed by STAT, Hyderabad.

3. The learned STAT vide the impugned order has dismissed the appeal preferred by the revision petitioner affirming the order passed by the Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling. The question of law put for consideration in this Tax Revision Case is as follows:

“i) Whether on facts and law the Hon'ble Tribunal is right in saying that the petitioner which is a Members Club is liable to tax on its supplies of food and drink to its own members.

ii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is right in completely overlooking the absolute mutuality between the club and its members.

iii) Whether Hon'ble Tribunal is right in distinguishing the provisions of APVAT Act from the provisions of the APGST Act and General Sales Tax Acts of other States when all derive their validity and scope from entry 54 of List II in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.

iv) While saying that the Advance Ruling Authority had no authority to determine whether or not petitioner is a Members Club is Hon'ble Tribunal right in upholding the advance ruling.”

4. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, it has been brought to the notice of this Bench that earlier there was another batch of Tax Revision Cases of similar nature in TREVC.No.68 of 2012 and batch which came up for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 16.02.2023, wherein the Division Bench of this Court taking into consideration the Larger Bench decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. Calcutta Club Limited, AIR 2019 SCC 5310 had decided the issues raised in this case and the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. For ready reference, we intend to reproduce the relevant paragraph Nos.4 to 8 wherein it has been held as under:

“4. When the above Revisions were taken up for hearing, Sri S.Dwarakanath, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners assessee would submit that the main question of law raised in the present revision cases viz., applicability of ‘principle of neutrality’ between the petitioners and its members is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of West Bengal and Others v. Calcutta Club Limited , wherein it was held that “the doctrine of Mutuality continues to be applicable to incorporated and unincorporated member’s clubs even after the 46th Constitutional Amendment and sub-clause (f) of Article 366(29-A) to the Constitution of India has no application to member’s clubs.

5. The Supreme Court in the decision of Calcutta Club Limited(supra) further held that the judgment rendered in the case of Joint Commercial Taxes Officer, Harbour Division-II, Madras v. Young Men’s Indian Association, wherein applying the doctrine of mutuality it was held that supply of food by clubs to its members would not amount to sale, continues to hold field even after the 46^th Amendment.

6. It is not in dispute that petitioner-clubs are incorporated and unincorporated member’s clubs. Thus, having regard to the position of law as enunciated by the Supreme Court, it is clear that the supply of food by the clubs, like petitioners, to its members cannot be considered as sale for being subjected to tax