Aroha Global vs. The Superintendent Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
5APHC010070472026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3529] WEDNE AY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 4003/2026 Between:
AROHA GLOBAL, GSTIN - 37ACKFA7939E1Z3 REP. BY ITS, MANAGING PARTNER, MR. P. CHARAN KUMAR, D.NO.1-22, OLD D.NO.1/89/2, THUMMALAGUNTA VILLAGE, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT PIN CODE- 517502, ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX (CGST) TIRUPATI RANGE -1, TIRUPTI - 517502, ANDHRA PRADESH
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, TIRUPATI-LL CIRCLE, TIRUPATI - 517502, ANDHRA PRADESH
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001
...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in proposing to cancel the registration of the Petitioner vide impugned show cause notice dated 7.1.2026 under the influence of the 2nd Respondent in it communication dated 6.1.2026 without making any independent enquiry on his own or without conducting assessment for the disputed period, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and violates Articles, 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the show cause notice dated 7.1.2026 as well as communication of the 2nd Respondent dated 6.1.2025, as contrary to Section 29 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, and and pass IA 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 pleased to suspend the operation of the show cause notice dated 7.1.2026 issued by the 1st Respondent, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
SANTHI CHANDRA
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Santhi Chandra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the show-cause notice, dated 07.01.2026, issued by the 1st respondent, proposing to cancel the registration of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that, this show-cause notice was issued solely, on the basis of a communication of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.01.2026, in which the 2nd respondent had informed the 1st respondent that the petitioner had been involved in misuse of e-way bills. The details of e-way bills, which are said to have been misused, are set out in the communication of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.01.2026. The 1st respondent had also served the communication of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.01.2026, on the petitioner to enable the petitioner to file a reply.
The contention of the petitioner is that, the 1st respondent had conducted a similar exercise earlier, and had dropped the cancellation proceedings. However, an afresh exercise was again undertaken, on the basis of the very same allegations, which are now raised by the 2nd respondent and such proceedings are clearly not valid.
It is settled law that, the Courts would normally intervene in cases, where show-cause notices are challenged, unless the said show-cause notices are clearly without juri iction or are in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and such other restricted grounds. In the present case, we do not find any such ground being available.
Though the petitioner contends that the proceedings have been initiated one after other on the same issues, the fact remains that specific instances of misuse are set out in the show-cause notice read with the communication of the 2nd respondent.
In such circumstances, it would not be appropriate for this Court to hold that the said exercise is arbitrary.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to file its reply or to file any additional reply and to make out a case, before the 1st respondent, for dropping further proceedings.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
_________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J
Date:25.02.2026 KPV THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.4003 of 2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
2026
KPV
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.