HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGE PVT. LTD. versus SANGLI MIRAJ & KUPWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 7 S.C.R. 766 · Decided: 04-07-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
8 
[2011] 7 S.C.R. 766 
HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGE PVT. LTD. 
V. 
SANGLI MIRAJ & KUPWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION 
& ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 4917 of 2011) 
JULY 4, 2011 
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND 
ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] 
C 
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949: 
s.2(42) - 'Octroi' - Levy of on glass bottles and plastic 
crates containing aerated beverages - Plea that bottles and 
crates are reusable and durable and were repeatedly used by 
0 manufacturer - Further plea that the prices of bottles and 
crates were amortized and included in retail. sale price of 
aerated beverages - HELD: If the oottles and crates have not 
finally rested in Municipal limits of the Corporation in which 
they are imported, the company can make an application for 
refund under the Rules with the relevant evidence - In case 
E the cost of bottles and crates is amortized and included in the 
retail sale price of the aerated beverages, evidence can also 
be placed in that regard in order to claim refund - The 
authorities may consider the proposal of the manufacturer or 
on their part devise a more convenient and workable 
F mechanism for levy and collection of octroi. 
The appellants, engaged in the manufacture and sale 
of aerated beverages, filed writ petitions before the High 
Court challenging the bills of the respondent-Municipal 
G Corporation levying octrol separately on the glass bottles 
and plastic crates utilized by the appellants to pack and 
transport the aerated beverages manufactured by them. 
It was contended for the appellants that the glass bottles 
and plastic crates were both re-usable and durable and 
H 
766 
HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGE PVT. LTD. v. SANGLI MIRAJ 767 
& KUPWAD MUNICIPAL CORP. 
were repeatedly used by the appellants. It was further A 
contended that the cost of glass bottles and crates were 
amortized and included in the retail sale price of the 
. aerated beverages. It was, therefore, pleaded that octroi 
could not be levied on the value of the glass bottles and 
crates and the impugned bills were, therefore, illegal and 
B 
arbitrary. The High Court, relying on the case of 
Acqueous Victuals* dismissed the writ petitions. However, 
liberty was granted to the appellants to claim refund by 
filing appropriate applications in case the bottles and 
crates were not sold, used or consumed in the Municipal c 
limits of the respondent-Corporation. Aggrieved, the 
manufacturer filed the appeals. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The instant case is squarely covered by 0 
the decision of this Court in the case of Acqueous 
Victuals.* The difference of the mode of computation of 
the octroi ·will not affect the applicability of the ratio of the 
said decision to the instant case and the same applies 
to the instant case on all fours. Accordingly, In case the 
E 
appellant-company is sending out the same bottles for 
recycling and if the bottles and crates are not sold, used, 
or consumed in the Municipal limits of the respondent-
Corporation, that is to say, if they have not finally rested 
in the Municipal limits of the respondent-Corporation in 
which they are imported, the appellant-company can 
always make an application for refund under the Rules. 
The appellant-company will have to produce evidence on 
the points detailed in the case of Acqueous Victuals*. In 
the instant case, the definition of "octroi" is contained in 
F 
s. 2(42) of the. Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation 
G 
Act, 1949. Relevant entry in respect of aerated water in 
the octroi schedule uo_der the Rules is at serial no.11 (0). 
Relevant entry as regards bottles is at serial no.52. 
Relevant entry as regards barrel crate and individual 
~ crate, is at serial No.53E. The Rules contain detailed 
H 
768 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 7 S.C.R. 
A provisions under which an importer can make .an 
application for refund. [para .18,22 and 23] (777-D-G; 780-
B-G] . 
*Acqueous Victuals Private Limited vs. State of Uttar 
B Pradesh & Ors. 1998 (3) SCR 290 =[1998] 5 SCC 474; and 
Burmah Shell Oil Storage & Distributing Company of India 
Limited v. Belgaum Borough Municipality 1963 Suppl. 
SCR 216 =AIR 1963 SC 906 - relied on 
S. M. Ram Lal & Co. v. Secretary to Government of 
C Punjab 1969 UJ 373 (SC), referred to. 
1.2. In case, the cost of the bottles and crates is 
amortized and included in the retail sale price of the 
aerated beverage, the evidence can also be placed in 
0 that regard, in order to claim refund on any
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.