THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO W.P.No.20716 OF 2008 ORDER : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr.A.V.A.Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel representing Mr.S.Chakrapani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.Chaitanya Kiran, learned counsel appearing for respondents. Perused the record.

2. The present is a Writ Petition which has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of assessment order, dated 30.08.2008, passed by the 2^nd respondent under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh VAT Act (as it then was).

3. The contention of the petitioner primarily is that the petitioners are engaged in business of trading orthopedic or fracture appliances and artificial joints and they are the registered dealer under the Commercial Tax Act.

4. According to the petitioner, the products which the petitioners are trading falls under Entry 2 of the Schedule I of the Andhra Pradesh VAT ACT now the Telangana VAT Act which is termed as “orthopedic or fractures appliances and artificial joints/implants used by handicapped persons”. According to the petitioner the products which they are dealing are exclusively those which are meant for the handicapped persons and therefore they are entitled for the exemption from payment of VAT under Section 17 of the Act.

5. It was also the contention of the petitioner that the government itself had specifically published a notification vide G.O.Ms.No.1615, dated 31.08.2005, wherein they have introduced certain items which would fall under Schedule I in annexure 1 of the said notification, it specifically lays down eight (08) items which would get added to Entry 2 of Schedule I and out of those eight (08) items is one being Orthopedic or fracture appliances and the second one is artificial joints. The petitioner primarily is seeking exemption under Section 17 of the Act to the products which fall under those category.

6. It was also the categorical contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that those items which the petitioners are trading and which do not fall under the aforesaid two categories, the petitioner has been paying the regular taxes without fail.

7. The grievance of the petitioner is that though this notification is published by the government on 31.08.2005, even after couple of years the respondent authorities are still not properly appreciating the exemption which the petitioner seeks for in terms of the aforesaid G.O.Ms.No.1615, dated 31.08.2005, rather they are initiating assessment proceedings on the aforementioned goods which according to the petitioner falls under Entry 2 of the Schedule 1 to be one which falls under Entry 111 of Schedule IV which was inserted with effect from 01.09.2005.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also have produced two government orders vide dated, 08.08.2006 and the other dated 22.05.2009. Both of which pertaining to the orthopedic or fracture appliances and both these products to be one which falls under Entry 2 of Schedule I being entitled for the exemption under Section 7 of the Act.

9. In addition, the learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the decision of the Division Bench of this High Court, decided on 31.07.2024, in W.P.No.1505 of 2019 and batch matters; where infact, during the course of the proceedings, the learned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Special Government Pleader for the Department itself has conceded the fact that artificial joints are one which falls under Entry 2 of Schedule I and have also conceded that the artificial joints are only meant and invented for the use of persons with disabilities/handicapped and thus, the learned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Special Government Pleader accepted for the quashment of the assessment order and to hold that the orthopedic or fracture appliances and the artificial joints which the petitioners trade in, being exempted from payment of VAT and being the products w