BharatTaxGST

Mr. Veera Reddy Voruganti vs. The Joint Commissioner

Original PDF →
WP/3386/2024HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01005915202416 June 2026Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,T.C.D.SEKHAR6 pages
For Petitioner: SHAIK JEELANI BASHAFor Respondent: D NAGARAJA KUMARI, Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central Government Counsel)

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010059152024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 3386/2024 Between: 1. MR. VEERA REDDY VORUGANTI, S/O.SRI V.LINGA REDDY, AGED 66 YEARS, H.NO.2-6-978, KLN REDDY COLONY, NAKKALA GUTTA, HANAMKONDA, WARANGAL DISTRIET. STATE OF TELANGANA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM CENTRAL GST COMMISSIONERATE, GST BHAVAN, PORT AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 035 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, CGST RANGE, VIZIANAGARAM WEST, NEAR DANDU NARAMMA TEMPLE, VIZIANAGARAM - 535 001. 3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent in passing the Order-In-Original No.VSP-EXCUS-JC54-23-24, passed Exparte, dated 17.11.2023 served on the Petitioner by RPAD on 04.01.2024 from the Office 2 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.3386 of 2024 of the 2 nd Respondent, without serving any show cause notice as alleged in the Order-in-Original, without providing an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, levying Service Tax of Rs. 1,47,15,726/- under Section 73(2) of the Finance Act 1994, Interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act 1994, Penalty of Rs. 1,47,15,726/- under Section 78(1) of the Finance Act 1994, Penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Section 77(1 )(a) of the Finance Act Rs.10,000/- under Section 77(1)(c) of the Finance Act at applicable rate 1994 and Penalty of 1994, for the tax period 2016-17, as arbitrary, contrary to law, without jurisdiction, barred by limitation even for the extended period and the Principles of Natural Justice and same is in violation of consequently set aside the Order-In- Original No.VSP-EXCUS-JC54-23-24, dated 17.11.2023 passed Exparte, as null and void and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to suspend the operation of the Order-In-Original No.VSP-EXCUS- JC54- 23-24, passed by the 1 st Respondent Exparte, dated 17.11.2023 served on the Petitioner by RPAD on 04.01.2024 from the Office of the 2nd Respondent, for the tax period 2016-17 under the Finance Act, 1994, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise,the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. D NAGARAJA KUMARI 2. Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central Government Counsel) 3 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.3386 of 2024

The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. D. Nagaraja Kumari, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

2.

The petitioner herein assails the Order-in-Original, dated 17.11.2023, passed under the Service Tax regime.

3.

In the aforesaid order, it is stated that the petitioner had been served with certain notices, calling upon the petitioner to explain why the turn- over of Rs.9,81,04,841/-, for the financial year 2016-17, based on the ITR/TDS information with the Income Tax Department, should not be treated to be turn-over relating to the services rendered by the petitioner and consequently, taxed. The said order further goes on to state that as no reply was received from the petitioner, to this notice, assessment proceedings were completed by treating the said turn-over to be turn-over arising out of services rendered by the petitioner in the State of Telangana and consequently were taxable.

4.

The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, has approached this Court, with the contention that no notice of any nature was received by the petitioner prior to the passing of the said order and that the said order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no service tax would be payable on the entire turn-over inasmuch as the said turn-over relates to the work done by the petitioner for the State of Telangana and the same is exempt. Disputes are also raised against the quantum of the turn-over.

6.

This Court had called upon the respondents to demonstrate proof of service of notices, which are said to have been issued to the petitioner prior to the passing of the impugned order.

7.

The learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents has made efforts to trace these records, but is unable to place these records before this Court.

8.

In those circumstances, it would have to be held that there has been no prior notice to the petitioner, prior to the passing of the impugned order and also there is violation of principles of natural justice.

9.

In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the Order-in-Original, bearing No.VSP-EXCUS-JC-54-23-24, passed on 17.11.2023 and served on the petitioner on 04.01.2024. Further, the matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent for undertaking the said exercise, after due notice and opportunity of hearing being given to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

Date:17.06.2026

MJA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 3386/2024 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Date:17.06.2026 MJA

Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.