Ravi Jayaram Gatla vs. The Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Ravi Jayaram Gatla, an Associate Vice President of FINO Payments Bank, filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court challenging a summons issued by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). The summons, bearing DIN No. 202603DSS40000666EED dated 07.03.2026, required the petitioner to provide information concerning 177 entities within a short timeframe of 37 hours. The petitioner contended that this timeframe was insufficient and the summons was illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction. The respondents, Union of India and DGGI, stated that since the petitioner did not appear on the previous day, fresh summons would be issued with sufficient time to respond.
Held
The Court noted that the impugned summons could not be acted upon as the petitioner had not appeared on the stipulated date. Consequently, the challenge to the summons in the present writ petition was rendered academic. The Court therefore disposed of the writ petition without delving into the merits of the case. No order as to costs was made, and any pending miscellaneous applications were also closed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the summons issued by Respondent No. 2, bearing DIN No. 202603DSS40000666EED dated 07.03.2026, is illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, violating the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, CBIC Instruction No. 03/2022-23, DGGI Guidelines for conducting investigation dated 08.02.2024, and Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the summons was illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction due to the unreasonably short period of 37 hours provided to furnish information regarding 177 entities. This action was contended to be violative of the CGST Act, 2017, relevant CBIC instructions, DGGI guidelines, and constitutional provisions. Revenue's Contention: The respondents (Union of India and DGGI) submitted that since the petitioner had not appeared on the previous day as summoned, fresh summons would be issued, granting him sufficient time to respond.
Sections Cited
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court macle the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TTIE HON'BLE THB CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THB HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN DATED: 10.03.2026 Between: Ravi Jayaram Gatla Petitioner AND The Union of lndia, rep., by its Secretary' Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Bloch New Dethi and 2 others. Respondents ORDER: Sri A. Venkatesh, learned Senior Counsel represents Sri S. Abhijeeth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General of India representing Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of tndia and Sri M.P. Kashyap, learned counsel for Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) appears for respondent Nos' l and2 and 3 respectivelY. I
2 ^- ---:---l
This writ petition was preferred with the following prayer: "For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus: A. Declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in issuing the summons bearing DIN.No.202603DSS400006668ED, dated 0't.03.2026 as illegal, arbitrary and without juri iction for being violative of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the CBIC ln struction N o.03 12022-23 (GS T- Investi gat ion ) dated I 7 .08.2022, the DGGI Guidelines for conducring investigation dated 08.02-2024 as well as Articles 14,20 and 2l of the Constitution of India. B consequently, set aside and quash the summons bearing DIN N c.202603 DSS40000666 EED. dated 07 .03 .2026; and C Pass any other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest ofjustice."
The petitioner has assailed the irnpugned summons on a number ofgrounds.
According to the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner could not appear on 09.03.2026 and respond to the sumrlons which required him to give information as regards 177 entities within a, short period of 37 hours from the time of issuance of summons.
Lrlarned Additional Solicitor General of India and the learned counsel for DGGI submits that since the petitioner has not appeared yesterdarr, fresh summons would be issued giving sufficient tirne to him to respond. I
,1./ 3
Since the impugned summons could not be acted upon, the challenge thereto in the present writ petition has been rendered academic. I'herefore, the instant writ petition is disposed of without going into the merits of the matter. There shall be no order as to costs. r !4iscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. il ,it //// $.: ry, Union of lndia, t\Iinistry of Finance New Delhi - 110001. B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OFFICER of Revenue To PSK.
The Secreta North Block,
The Superintendent / Senior lntelligence Officer Hyde Plot I Zonal Unit, ST lntelligence r, Hyderabad, T (DGGr), No.212and 213, Block 8, Kavuri Hills, [\Iadhapu ela - 500033. ngana Zonal
The Additional Director General Hyderabad Unit, Directorate General of Block 8, Kavuri Hills, 4 loPUCl
One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of India [OPUC]
One CC to SRI Iv|.P.KASHYAP, SC FOR DGGI [OPUC]
Two CD Copies Directorate General of G GST lntelligence (DGGI), Plot No. 212 and -213, Madhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500033. One CC to SRI S.ABHIJEETH REDDY, Advocate far BS
*i HIGH COIJRT DATED:10/03/2026 on rat t t ORDER WP.No.7333 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS -t1& o (j o g APR zoa6 z * rcH * q tr*P
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.