Pulluri Krishnamurthy vs. The Union Of INDIA

WP/30322/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01059889202508 October 2025Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN5 pages

For Respondent: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Pulluri Krishnamurthy, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana challenging three Orders in DRC-07s, dated December 19, 2023. These orders were issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and the Superintendent of Central Tax, among other respondents from the Union of India and the GST Commissionerate. The petitioner sought a declaration that these orders were non-est, void ab-initio, without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution. The petition also included an application for an interim stay to restrain the respondents from recovering the demands confirmed under the impugned orders. The tax periods and the specific amounts in dispute are not explicitly recorded in the provided text.

Held

The Court did not decide on the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought and was granted permission to withdraw the writ petition. The Court allowed this withdrawal with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also stated that there would be no order as to costs, and any pending miscellaneous applications were to stand closed. The specific reasons for seeking withdrawal or the grounds on which a fresh petition might be filed were not elaborated upon in the judgment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Orders in DRC-07s, dated December 19, 2023, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and the Superintendent of Central Tax, are non-est, void ab-initio, without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Indian Constitution. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions, seeking their quashing. The petitioner relied on the affidavit filed with the writ petition to support these claims. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the respondents (Union of India and its various tax authorities).

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

I [ 3488 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,IHE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO IHOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN Between: AND 1 2 3 4 5 Pulluri Krishnamurthy, S/o Pulluri Laxminarayana, Aged about 63 Years having Address, 5-2-60 and 61, Pedda Bazar, Sircilla, Rajanna District, Telangana-505301, Telangana, 505301. ...PETITIONER The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi- 1 10001. The Comnrissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise and Service Tax. [t/ledchal GST Commissionerate, 1 1-04-6498, Lakdi-Ka-Pul, Hyderabad- 500004. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Central GST, Karimnagar CGST Division, H.No.8-7-29611 , Hanuman Nagar, Karimnagar-505001 . The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Cjrcle-lV, Hyderabad Audit -ll Commissionerate, NGOs Colony Road, Hanmkonda. Warangal-506001 . The Superintendent of Central Tax, Circle-lV, Group 42. Hyderabad Audit - Il Commissionerate, NGOs Colony Road, Hanmkonda. Warangal-506001 . ..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 direction or Order, more particularly in the nature of a writ of l/landamus or any other appropriate Writ, declaring the Orders in DRC-07s vide Reference Nos. 2D3612230353830, 2D361223035734J and No 2D361223035746E, all daled 1911212023, as non-est and void ab-initio, without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles t9(1) (g) and 300,4 of the lndian Constitution WRIT PETITION NO: 30322 OF 2025 { I I lA NO: '1 OF 202!; Petition under Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court tlay be pleased to grant an interim stay rr:lief to restrain the Respondents from initiating any action to recovei- the demanCs confirnred under the impugned Orders, in DRC-07s vide Reference No ;4D3612230353830, 2D361223035734J and No 2D361223O35746E. al Cated 19-12-2023 pending disposal of this writ petition Counsel for the Petitic,ner: SRl. M.UMASHANKAR Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2to5: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR CBIC

The Court made the following: ORDER I

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.3O322 ot 2025 ORDER: Learned counsel Sri M.Uma Shankar appears for the peLltloner. ). This writ petition has been filed rvith the follou'ing prayer "For thc reasons stated in the accompan5,ing affidavit, therefore it is prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to isslre a direction or Order, more particularly in tl-rc naturc of a s.rit of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, decla,ring the Orders in DRC-07s vide Reference Nos.ZD36 12230353830, ZD361223O35734J and No.ZD361223O357 468, all dated 19- l2-2O23 as non-est and void ab-initio, without juri iction, illegal, arbitrary ernd violative of Articles 19(l)(g) and 3OOA of the lndi:rn Constitution, ald/or pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to w.ithdrar.r, the n'rit petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh q,rit petition

r-- is, therefore, disrtrisscd AS withdras,n rvjth the aforesaid iiberty. Horvever, thcre shall 1. The wrir petition be no order as to costs Miscellar-reous applications pending, if :rny, shall stand closed. . . :)SMAN ALI BAIG ,' SI TT\NT REGISTRAR SI:CTION OFFICER I To,

One CC

One CC loPUCl to SRI I\4 UI\4ASHANKAR, Advocate [OPUC] to SRI f.l BHUJANGA RAO. Deputy Solicitor General of lndia

One CC to SRI

Two CD Copies ]OIVINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR CBIC [CIPUC] M. et.'l ,D/ BS (

a HIGH COURT DATED:0811012025 ORDER )) $1N[\i M '.t t WP.No.30322 ctf 2025 1-r5SP/r1CS6C DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS \ I \u ,'q I I I {"

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.