Judgment
[ 34881 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH ANO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 439 OF 2026 Between:
IVI/s. United Engineering Co, Rep. by its Proprietor, Nagaraju Aged 43 years Occ. Business 8-501215, Medipally, Medchal-Malkajgiri 500092. Telangana.
Mrs. Ediga lJladhavi, Wo Srinivas Colony, Boduppal, .....PETITIONER ANO '1. The Superintendent of Central Tax, Uppal CGST Range, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad.
2. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, (Revenue), Secretariat, Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 in Order-in-Original No. 94/2024-25-Adjn-GST under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 passed by the 1st respondent based on the un-signed show cause notice dated. 26.11.2024 in Form DRC-01 , demanding an amount of Rs.3,40,8461 (Rs.12,2121- IGST, Rs.1,64,317/- CGST and Rs.1,64,317/- SGST) and also imposition of penalty of Rs.65,728l- (Rs 32,864/- IGST, Rs.16,4321 CGST and Rs.16,432l- SGST) under Section 73(1) of the CGST AcL,2017. under for the
financial year 2020-21 as illegal, contrary to the provisions of Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, unjustified besides being violative of principles of natural justice.
!.A.NO:1 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 all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 passed by the 1st respondent under Section 73(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 in Order-in- Original No. 94/2024-25-Adjn-GST based on the un-signed show cause notice dated 26 11.2024 in Form DRC-01 for the financial year 2020-21 during the pendency of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI B.SRINIVAS, REPRESENTING SRI M.V.L.NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : M/s DOMINIC FERNANDES (SENIOR STAND|NG COUNSEL FOR CB|C) Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Couns.el for the Respondent No.3 : G.P FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHTEF JUSTICE SRI APATIESH KUMAR SINGH AND THF' SR TION'BLE .II E G.M.MOHItJDDIN I WRIT PETITION No.439 ot 2026 Dated: 08.01.2026 Between:
Mls. United Engineering Co ... Petitioner and The Superintendent of Central 'fax.
UppalCGST Range, [{amanthapur, I{yderabad, and2 others.
... Respondents ORDER:
Learned counsel Sri B.Srinivas, representing learned counsel Sri M.V.L.Narasirnha Rao, appears for the petitioner Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, appears fbr respondent I No.1.
,) 2.
The writ petition has been preferred against the ordcr-in-original clated 25.02.2025 passed under Section 73 of the cenrral Goods and Serviccs Tax Act. 2017.Ibr lhe tax period 2020-2021 inrposing rhe tax.
1rcnalt1, and interest.
3.
1'he petitioner has approached this court alleging that it has come to knorv about thc liabilitl, only upon receiving call frorn the authorities dernancling the tax and in vicr.v of the bank attachment in [rorm GST DI{C- li.
4.
I-lorvever. afier sonre arguments, learned counsel fbr the petitioncr seeks libcrty to thc pctitioner to prefcr an appeal against the order-in-original. FIe subrnits that sorne delay might have been occurrecl in approaching thc appellate authority and therefbre, he rnay be directecl to consider it syrnpathetically.
5.
Learned Senior Standing counsel for cBIC submits thar the petitioner rvas at liberty to prefer an appeal against the order-in-original takin-e all the grounds as are available in law and on facts before the appellate authoritl,in respect of the subject tax period.
I
J 6.
However, upon hearing the leanted counsel for the parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer an appeal, we do not rvish to comment or-r the merits of the contentions raised by the parties 7.
Il'the petitioner prelers an appeal r,vithin a period of trvo w'eeks ri,ith statutory pre-deposit. the learncd appellate authority u'otrld consider it in accordance rvith law also keeping into consideration that it has been pursuing the writ rernedy before this Court in thc meantime as rvcll. 'l-he petitioner will bc at liberty to take all the grounds in larv ancl on thcts befbre the appellate authority.
8.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of rvith the afbresaid liberty. Horvever, there shall be no order as to costs viscdt laneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
SD/-A. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY'/ '7 @ SECTION OFFICER .l"l To 1.
2.
3 4 5 6 7 The superintendent of central Tax, Uppal CGST Range, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad.
The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry- of Finance, G.overnment of lndia' 3rd rioor, lu"urti be"[ Building, Sansad--Marq, \ey!elhi-110 001' fne Frincipal SecrEtiry, (n6r"nue), Secrelariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad Two CC',s to G.P FOR COMTVIERCIAL TAX, High court for the state of Telangana at HYderabad -(99.D. . - On" Ct to Snlivr.V.l.NninStVtHA RAO, Advo^cate [OPUCI one CC to M/s DOMINiC rEnUAr.roES (SENIOR STANDING CoUNSEL FOR CBIC) Advocate [OPUC] - - ONE CC tO SRI N iii-Ui-Aru-CN RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF lNDlA, Advocate (OPUC) Two CD Copies 8 SA BS .t.rr
l HIGH COURT DATED:08 t0112026 ORDER WP.No.439 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS.
03 rr8 2m SIa ( o * v2 o ;t p( N t\