M/S. Sudhamayee Papers P LTD vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, M/s. Sudhamayee Papers P Ltd, filed a writ petition challenging an Order in Original dated 12-08-2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax. This order imposed tax, interest, and penalty for the financial year 2019-20. The Petitioner contended that it could not participate in the proceedings due to a major fire accident on 18.06.2023, which destroyed its premises. Furthermore, the Petitioner claimed that no show cause notice was served, and no notice in ASMT-10 was issued for reconciliation of the mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A before initiating proceedings. The Petitioner also raised the issue of lack of notice for personal hearings.
Held
The Court, without commenting on the merits of the case, granted liberty to the Petitioner to approach the appellate authority within two weeks, subject to statutory pre-deposit. The Court noted that the Petitioner was inclined to avail the appeal remedy. If the Petitioner files an appeal, the appellate authority is directed to consider the case in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations. The Court did not decide on the validity of the Order in Original or the Petitioner's claims regarding the fire accident and lack of notice.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Order in Original dated 12-08-2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, is arbitrary, illegal, unsustainable in law, violative of principles of natural justice, and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India, due to alleged lack of proper notice and the impact of a fire accident on the Petitioner's ability to participate in proceedings? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that it was unable to participate in the proceedings due to a major fire accident and that no show cause notice or notice in ASMT-10 was issued for reconciliation. The Petitioner also claimed a lack of notice for personal hearings, rendering the order illegal and violative of natural justice and constitutional provisions. Revenue's Arguments: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submitted that the grounds alleging lack of service of notice of personal hearing or the fire accident incidents could be controverted only upon receipt of instructions. However, if the Petitioner intended to avail the appeal remedy, the Court could pass an appropriate order.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 50, Section 73(9)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER a THE HON'BLD THD CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.291O9 of 2025 ORDER: Ms. K.Prabl-rabati, lcarned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Clrstoms (CBIC) appears lor respondent No. 1
Petitioner has approached this Court againsf the Order in-Original dated 12.O8.2024 whereby tax, interest ard pena,lt1, has been imposed upon it for the linancial 1'ear 20l9-2O. Petitioner could not participate in the proceedings as there rl,ere major fire accident incidents on 18.O6.2023. No show cause notice is served to the petitioner. Petitioner has ancl inabiliq' to participate because of the major fire accident incidents in its premises. The impugned demand relates to mismatch betq'een GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A for reconciliation of which no such notice in ASMT 10 was issued upon scrutinli of its returns before initiation of proceedings. inter alia taken the plea o[ lack of notice for persona,l hearings
3' Learned counsel for the petitioner sr-tbmits that if petitioner is allou'erl lit,erty, it ma-v approach the ztppellate aurhoritv to r:dse a1l '.he grounds r>f larr' in fact availablc to it.
Learne d Senior Standing Counsel fbr CBIC tl-rougl-r submits that the grounds on fact alleging lack of service of notice of personal hearing or major fire accident incidents havc been taken. r','h ich can be contror.erted onlv u pon receipt of instructions, horr..ever il the petitioner is inclint:d to avail the appeal remed-1 , this Court mav pass appropriatc: orcier as may be deemed fit.
In the r,eculiar facts ar-rd circurflstances noted above, since the petitioner is incUned to approach the appellate lcrrum, this Court, u,it;rout commentinq on the mcrits cl the case of the parties, is inclined to grarit libert-v" to the petitiorrr:r to rppro".n the appellate authoritlr rvithin period of tu c, weeks u'ith statutory pre cleposit. [n case the pctitioner prelers such an appeal, the appellate autlrorit_\' u'ould corrsider the case, in accorcialce ririt.r lar,i .
With these obscrvations, the instant Writ Petition is disposed r.rf. H<in'er-er. there shall be no order as t. costs
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand To, closed . JAWAHAR REDD TANT RE R ,' ECTION OFFICER
The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Nagole C T Division, '1st Floor. Sai Balali Arcade, 2-3-908, Plot No. '183 and 184, Sy. No.
Co-operative Bank Colony, Nagole Village, Uppal (lvlandal), Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad - 500068
The Secretary, t\Iinistry of Finance, Union of lndia, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad lVlarg, New Delhi-1 10001. 3. One CC to Ms.K.PRABHABATI, Advocate. [OPUC]
One CC to SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, (Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC) loPUCl
One CC to Deputy Solicitor General of lndia, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OPUC] Two CD Copies BSK BS 6 /w
HIGH COURT DATE D:25 lAgt2025 ORDER WP.No.29109 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS {{ o . '>i ,. J,.i -.:.-.. ( \i\ 3 1 0[T 2925 o gar416HIo :'l ">/ e" (H{*
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.