Judgment
6 [ 34881 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH 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: 9234 OF 2026 Between:
M/s.lnam lmpex Private Limited, 1-4-48311, Bholakpur, Musheerabad, Hyderabad- 500 020. State of Telangana Rep. by its Managing Director Mr.Abdul [Vlajeed, aged about 45 years, Occupation. Business ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Office of the Joint Commissioner (ST), Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad.
The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gandhi Nagar Circle, Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad.
The Deputy State Tax Officer, Gandhi Nagar, Hyderabad.
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.
...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 Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring. ('l )the Section t 6(2)(c) read with Section 41(2) of the CGST/SGST Act 2017 is ultra vires to Article la, 19(1Xg), 21 , 265 and 300A of the Constitution of lndia, (2)the action of the 'lstRespondent in passing the Order, dated 30.12.2025, the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 30.12.2025 and the Attachment to Proceedings in GST DRC-07, dated 30.12.2025 Exparte, levying Tax, lnterest, Fees and Penalty under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST/IGST Act 2017, without providing an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, is arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Acts and is not valid 2 3 4
in the eye of law and in violation of principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law and consequently set aside the Order, dated 30.12.2025, the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 30..12.2025 and the Attachment to Proceedings in GST DRC-07, dated 30.'r2.2025 passed by the rst Respondent, for the tax period 2021-22 under the CGST/SGsT/IGST Acts 2017, as null and void.
lA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under section 1si cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order, dated 30.12.2025, the Summary of the order in Form GST DRc-07, dated 30.12.2025 and the Aftachment to proceedings in GST DRC-07, dated 30.'r2.2025 passed by the 1sr Respondent, for the tax period 2021-22 under the CGST/SGST/IGST Acts 2017, pending rJisposal of the above writ Petition, as otherwise, the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
counserrorthePetitio'"'':"T:,tJH'ff SEit-fi1[""4:?i' counsel for the Respondents : sRr swARoop ooRrLLA, sc FoR srATE TAx The Court made the fotlowing: ORDER
-ffi7.:- 7 i IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.9234 of 2026 DATED: 31.03.2026 Between:
Ir4/s. Inam Impex Private Limited, | -4 -483 I 1, Bholakpur, Musheerabad, Hyderabad-500 020, State of Telangana Rep. by its Managing Director Mr. Abdul Majeed, aged about 45 years, Occupation: Business AND The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Oflfice of the Joint Commissioner (ST), Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad & 3 others ORDER:
... Petitioner .. Respondents appearing for the respondents.
Heard Mr. Shaik Jeelani Basha, leamed counsel representing t I Mr. Mohammed Rafi, leamed counsel appearing lor the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Govemment Pleader lor State Tax 2.
The registration of the petitionet'was cancelled on 09.09.2024 which rs not yet challenged in any proceeding. The present writ petition seeks to lay challenge to the order-in-original dated 30.12.2025 passed for the assessment
2 year 2021-22 plus the summary of the order of the same date imposing tax, interest and penalty upon the petitioner on the charge of having claimed excess ITC than what was declared by its suppliers. Petitioner has also laid a challenge to the vires ofSection l6(2)(c) ofthe Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2OlTlCentral Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the TGST AcI/CGST Act') on the ground that the impugned liability is allegedll, due to non-deposit of taxes by the supplier despite payment made against invoices raised by it and ITC availed by the petitioner consequent thereto 3.
However, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appearing for the respondents has pointed out that there are no specilic allegations in the show cause notice or findings in the irnpugned order-in-original to the eflect that the petitioner has availed ITC without raxes deposited by the supplier in lieu ol invoices raised by it 4.
Leamed counsel lor the petitioner submits that the invoices raised by its supplier have been duly paid on the basis of which Il-C has been claimed though it appears that the taxes were not deposited by the supptier. Therefore, ingredients for disallowance invoking Secrion l6(2)(c) of the TGST AcI/CGST Act are made out, to chailenge the vires of Section 16(2)(c) of the TGST Act/CGST Act.
5.
However, on scrutiny of the materials on record including the show cause I I notice and the findings in the order-in-original, it appears that the proceedings
'sry 3 I' t, I against the petitioner were initiated for having availed excess ITC compared to the taxes declared by its supplier on the supplies made to it. It is not evident lrom the order-in-original that the supplier has failed to deposit the taxes paid by the petitioner in lieu of the supplies made against invoices raised by it. In such a case, whether the taxes have been paid in lieu of invoices raised by its supplier and after receipt of goods by the petitioner depend upon scrutiny of material documents which are within the domain of the statutory authority including the appellate authority.
6.
Therefore, we decline to entertain the challenge to the vlres of Section l6(2)(c) of the TGST Act/cGST Act in the present writ petition. peritioner is at tiberty to avail the remedy of appeat by making statutory pre-deposit within the Iimitation period prescribed under Section 107(l) read with Sub-section (4) of the TGST AcI/CGST Act.
7.
The instant Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
SD/- A .JAYASRE ASS]STANT REG //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER / 1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Office of the Secunderabad Division, HydeiabSO.
2. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gandhi Nagar Ci Division, Hyderabad.
mmissioner (ST), , Secunderabad 3. The Deputy State Tax Officer, Gandhi Nagar, Hyderabad.
4. The Principal secretary, Revenue (cr) Department, Terangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.
=-#
-YV A I 5. One CC to SRI MOHAMTUED RAF1, Advocate. tOpUCl 6. One CC to SRI SWAROOP OOR|LLA, Spl.c.p for State Tax. [OpUC] 7. Two CD Copies.
BSK TKS /
\ o \ HIGH COURT DATED:31 10312026 ORDER to R 'rH I :? ot nn ,-*\, ",\ \\ ttt \\ ?m ii tt(r.\it "t^ 'r\:'..
WP.No.9234 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS * :rr,* r ii;,1) (0jl,,