Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[ 34881
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN
WRIT PETITION NO: 21039 OF 2026
Between:
Ms. Harsha Developers, Plot No. 41, Nagarjuna Hills, Punjagutta, Hyderabad
500082 Represented by its Partner, Gadiraju Venkata Satya Kishore Raju S/o.
G Krishnam Raiu,Aged about 57 years, Ri/o. D No 6-23,D Block, Flat No 1701,
Sky high Apartment, Shaikpet, Nanakramguda,Telangana-500008
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, GST
Bhavan, L B Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500004
2. Additional Commissioner of Central Tax,, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate,
GST Bhavan, L B Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500004
3. Commissioner of Central Tax, Appeals-l Hyderabad Commissionerate, 7th
Floor, GST Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad- 500004
4. The Superintendent of Central Tax, 3rd Floor, GST Bhavan, Basheerbagh,
Hyderabad -500004
5. Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Represented by its Secretary, North Block,
New Delhi-110 001
6. State of Telangana, Through Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue
Depa(ment (Commercial Tax), Hyderabad, Telangana
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased
to issue a writ. order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of
mandamus declaring (a)Sub-rule 3) of Rule 42 of the Central Goods and Services
Tax Rules, 2017 as amended by Notification No..l6/2019 Central Tax dated
29.03.2019 to be ultra vires, u nconstitutional and void to the extent it mandates
inclusion of rnput tax credit availed during the period from 01 .07.2017 to 31 03 2019
(i.e., prior to the effective date of the said amendment) in the final computation and
consequential reversal thereunder, on the ground that such mandate confers a
retrospective operation upon a prospective amendment, in violation of (i) the express
effective date of 01.04.2019 prescribed in Notification No 16/2019 itself, (ii) the
settled constitutionat principle that a subordinate legislation cannot, in the absence of
express retrospective authority in the parent statute, be given effect anterior to its
notified effective date and (iii) Articles 14, 19, 26s and 3004 of the constitution of
lndia, insofar as it deprives the Petitioner of vested and accrued lrc rights without
authority of law, (b)ln the alternative, declarrng that sub rule (3) of Rule 42 of the
CGST Rules, 2017, as amended by Notification No 16/20.19, shall be read down
and construed as apphcable only in respect of lrc availed on or after 01 .04.2019,
and that it does not empower the Respondents to reverse or demand reversal of any
lrc availed during the period 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2019 oy invoking the said
amended sub-rule (c)The impugned order order-in-Appeal bearing Ref no HyD-
GST-HYC-APP1'075-2025-26 dated 30-09-2025 atong with Form ApL-04 bearing
2D361225044008N dated 12 12.202s passed by the Respondent No.3 under the
provisions of cGST/TGSr Ad, 2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without
jurisdiction, without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19,26s
and 3004 of the constitution of lndia, and to consequently set aside the same.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026
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 to stay
operation of impugned order-in-Appeal bearing ref no HyD-GST-Hyc-Appi -075-
i1025-26 dated 30-09-2025 atong with Form ApL-04 bearing zD361225o44oogN
dated 12 12.2025 passed by the Respondent No. 3
Counsel
Counsel
Counsel
Counsel
for the Petitioner : SRI P.VENKAT REDDY,
rep., M/s.P.V PRASAD ASSOCIATES
for the Respondents No.lto4 : SRI D.RAGHAVENDRA RAO
(sR sc FoR cBlc)
for the Respondents No.S: SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO,
DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
for the Respondents No.6: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 'Ihe Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Aparesh Kumar Sineh and The Hon'ble Sri Justice G.M.Mohiuddin Writ Petition No.2103 9 of2026 Dated: 14.07.2026 Betlyeen: M/s. Harsha Developers, Plot No.41, Nagarjuna Hills. Punlagutta, Hyderabad-500082, Represented hy rts Partner. Gadiraju Venkata Satya Kishore Raju, S/o. G. Krishnam Raj u Petitioner AND Joint Commissioner of Central fax, Hyderabad CST Comrnissionerare, (iST Bhavan. L Il Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500004 and five others ... Respondents ORDER: Heard Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel representing M/s. P.V Prasad -A.ssociates, tbr the petitioner and Mr. D. Raghavendar Rao, leamed Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Cusroms (CBIC), appearing fbr respondent Nos.1 to 4. )
2.The petitioner 1S challenging the order-in-appeal dated 30.09.2025 insofar as it upholds the reversal of lnput Tax Credit (ITC), interest and penalty by retrospectively applying Rule 42(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short 'the Rules'), to ITC availed prior to 01.04.2019, the date on which the amended Rule 42(3) of tbe Rules came into force.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the application of the amended Rule in that fashion is illegal arrd ultra vires the parent Act and takes away the benefits enjoyed under the existing Rule. He has inter alia taken other grounds on merits as well.
4.Leamed Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that against the impugned order-in- appeal, the petitioner has a remedy of appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT).
5.In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the Writ Appeal with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the ieamed GSTAT
3
6.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal along rvith statutory pre- deposit before the leamed GSTAT, taking all such grounds of law and facts available to it. Needless to say, this Court has not expressed any opinion on thc merits of the case. No order as to cosls Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// I I L To, TKS BSK rk SECTION OFFICER '1 . One CC to M/S P.V.PRASAD ASSOCIATES, Advocate [OPUC]
2.One CC to SRI D.RAGHAVENDRA RAO, (SR SC FOR CBIC). [OPUC]
3.Two CCs to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
4.One CC to N BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA loPUCl
HIGH COURT DATED: 1410712026 ORDER WP.No.21039 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS ^?al L) ccY' ,,,/, i/: liu '\r ,/(.t ) ,,;3e'i,.iii -.^ \- 2 4 JUL 2[2E . r.r. i^ c.; A tl ) lr, { \ t \ O6SPATC {- sCo \: 2t % Sa
