Saini Semiconductors PVT. LTD. vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD AND DATED: 15.06.2026 Between: M/s. Saini Semiconductors Pvt. Ltd., Shed No.53, Plot No.166lB,IDA Phase II, Cherlapally, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 051 Represented by its Managing Director, Shri Mahesh Saini, S/o. Late Anand Kumar Saini ... Petitioner AND The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Uppal CGST Division, Secunderabad GST Commissionerate, l-i-tlSlz,Elegant Edifice Building, 2nd Floor, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad - 500 013 & 3 others Respondents ORDER: Heard Mr. V.Sai Amit, learned counsel representing iWs. P.V. Prasad Associates, for the petitioner, Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) appearing for respondent Nos.l to 3 and Mr. K.Mahesh, learned counsel representing Mr' N'Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.
TI PE \\
2 2 The rvrit petition has been preferred with the following prayer: "For all the reasons stated in the accompanying aflidavit, it is prayed that this Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction rnore particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandarnus declaring that i. Impugned Order-in-Original bearing Order No 94l2024-25-Ajn(AC)- GST dated 17 .09.2024 along with consequential lbrms in Form DRC 07 vide Reference Nos. 2D36102401 15305, 2D361024011544W and ZD3 6 l 0240 l 1 5 4gM, ZD3 6 l O24O l 1 5 59L dated 1 0.1 0.2024, passed by the Respondent No. I under the provisions of Section 74 of the CCST/TSGST Act, 2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without juri iction, without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, I 9( I )(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and directing Respondent No. I to treat and/or re-adjudicate the demand contained therein as one falling under Section 73 ofthe CGST/TSGST Act' 2017 ' so as to make the Petitioner eligible for the bcnefit of the Amnesty Schente under Section l28A of the CGST/TSGST Act, 2017 and to consequently set aside the same and/or pass such further or other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ii. Impugned order in Form SPL-07 vide Order Ref' No ZD361 12504101 3 I andZD36|l2504l059Ldatedl3-ll.2025passedbytheRespondentNo.3 under the provisions of CGST/TSGST Act' 201'7 as being void' arbitrary' illegal, without juri iction, without authority of larv apart from being violative of Articles 14, l9(lXg) and 265 ofthe Constitution of lndia' and to consequently. set aside the same and/or pass such further or other order{s) as this Hon'ble Court may deern fit and proper in the circumstances of the case
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to confine his prayer to challenge to the order-in-original dated 17'09'2024 andhe submits that petitioner would not be pressing the challenge to the rejection of his application for availing AmnestY Scheme'
J
Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that the Amnesty Scheme is applicable only in cases covering the proceedings under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act,2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order-in- original. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in approaching n n the appellate authority and therefore, it may be directed to consider the delay.
Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order-in-original taking all the grounds as are available in law and on facts before the appellate authority in respect of the subject tax period.
However, upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer an appeal, we do not wish to comment on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties.
We grant liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The petitioner may take all such grounds of law and facts in the memo of appeal as are available to it. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the I \
4 question of delay taking into account the aforesaid facts and circumstances and ifit is satisfied on the point ofdelay, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law.
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR EFFII T REGISTRAR //I/ TION OFFICER I t -\_ lo
The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Uppal CGST Division, secunderabad GST Commissionerate, 3-4-11812, Elegant Edifice Building, 2nd Floor, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad 500 013. 2. The Assistant commissioner of central Tax, Anti Evasion, secunderabad GST Commissionerate, GST Bhawan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad 500 004' 3.TheAssistantCommissionerofCentralTax,KapraGSTDivision' secunderabad GST Commissionerate, 3-4-11812, Elegant Edifice Building, 2nd Floor, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad 500 013' 4. ihe Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance North Block' New Delhi- 110 001. s. onl Cc to Mis P.V.PRASAD ASSoCIATES, Advocate [oPUc]
ONC CC tO SRI OOITAIT'TIC-TTNT'TANDES, SE[!I-OR STANDING COUNSEL FOR CENTRAL BOAFiDbi_ir'rOriEC[ TAXES AND CUSTOMS (CBIC)' Advocate (OPUC) 7. one CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAo, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Advocate [OPUC] L Two CD CoPies SA BS
HIGH COURT DATED: 1510612026 ORDER WP.No.18067 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. p( oo 0 2 JUt 2mE ! ttrE STAIA- ( ,( q' i i -.,,,_,9 , r\n\tu' ii
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.