BharatTaxGST

M/S. Kvrecpl Slns Jv vs. The Assistant Commissioner State Tax

Original PDF →
WP/8699/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01017443202625 March 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN7 pages
For Petitioner: SRI VENI(ATRAM REDDY MAi'ITUR, ail;irorirreRespondentN$=Llft Bffi*#:BEf FSl.ShrEro, (For Respondent: SRI DOMINIC FERNA].IDES, SC FOR CBIC

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
\ 134881 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Origlnal Jurisdiction) WEDNESOAY THE T\4/ENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUttlAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN YI'RIT PETffiON NO: 8699 OF 2026 Between: M/s. I(/RECPL SLNS JV, H.No. 17-1-382/8/17, Prashanti Nilayam, Bhanu Nagar, Champapet, Saroomagar Mandal, Rangareddy, Telangana - 500079. Rep. By lts Managing Partner Sri. Thotakura Kishan Kumar ...'ET'T'ONER AND 1. The Assistant Commissioner State Tax, Saroornagar 3-Circle, Saroornagar Division, Hyderabad. 2. The State fax officer (ST), Office of the Assistant Commissioner State Tax Saroornagar-3 Circle; 2na fl oor Gaganvihar Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad TG-5fi)001 3. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Deoartment. Telanoana Secretariat. Hvderabad. 4. Th; Union df hdia,-Rep. by ib Secretdry, Ministry of Finance, North Block, Nor Delhi -1 10 001. 5. The Cenbal Boad of lndirecl Taxes and Customs, Rep. by its Chairman, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 100 001' ..REspoNDENTs Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated ln the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring. 1) the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the arrear notice dated 13-03-2026 demanding an amount of Rs.83,30,872l- under the CGST/TSGST Ad.2017, for the tax gedod 2019-20 (wrongly mentioned 2018-19) and the lst respondent passed the order of rejection of application for rectification vide reference no.2D361125055663E dated 18-11-2025 without issuing prior noticer/ show cause notice/ perconal hearing notice passing ex+artie orders are illegal, arbitrary, and not valid in the eye of law. and to set aside the order of rejection of application for rectification dated 18-11-2025, the arrear notice for demanding an amount dated 13.03.2026 issued by the 2nd Respondent' is not valid. (2) the action of the 1st Respondent passing the ex-partie order of r.ejection of apptication for rectification dated 18-1 1-2025 without following the cBlc Notification No. 2212O24-CT dated 08-10-2024 is not valid in the eye of law. and the 2nd rer;pondent issued arrear notice dated 13-03-2026 is illegal. (3) the action of the 1st Respondent in passing the ex-partie, order of reiection of applicatior for rectification dated 18-11-2025 without providing an opportunity of personal rearing it is contrary to the provisions of the Act under section 75 (4) of the CGST Act,20l7 is not valid in the eye of law. (4) the action of the 1st Respondent in passing the lmpugned order of rejection of application for rectification dated 18-11-2025 with out verifying the proper records of the petitioner vage allegations mentioned in the order is not correct and it is violation of principals of natural iustice under Article 14' 19(1Xg)' 265. lA NO: 1 lrF 2026 Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstiances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order of rejection of application for rectification dated 18-11-20'.'.5 passed by the 1st Respondent, for the tax period 2O19-2O under the CGST/SCiST Acl 2017 , pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. lA NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstiances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to STAY all further proceedings and recovery actions pursuant to the lmpugned order of reiection of application for rectification dated 18-11-2025 and the arrear Notice dated 13 03.2026 for the tax period 20'19-20. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VENI(ATRAM REDDY MAi'ITUR ail;irorirreRespondentN$=Llft Bffi*#:BEf FSl.ShrEro,( Counsel forthe Respondent uo.n: SnifI.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUW : SOLIGITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI DOMINIC FERNA].IDES, SC FOR CBIC

The Court made the totiowing: ORDER

IN TITE HIGH COURT FOR THE !T4TE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESHJ('MAR SINGH AND : THE HON'BLE SRI CE G.M.MOIIruDDIN WRIT PETITION No.8699 of 2A26 DATED: 25.03.2026 Between: IWs. KVRECPL SLNS JV, H.No. 17 -L -38218,/ I 7, Prashanti Nilayam, Bhanu NMa13ar, Champapet, Saroornagar Mandal, Rangareddy, Telangana - 500 079, Rep. by its lr{anaging Partner Sri Thotakura Kishan Kumar Petitioner AND The Assistarrt Commissioner State Tax, Saroornagar 3-Circle, Saroomagar Division, Hyderabad {t 4 others Respondents ORDER: Hearc. Mr. venkatram Reddy Mantur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for r State Tax ap,pearing tor the respondents.

2.

The order-in-original dated 17.08.2024 for the ta;< period 2019-20 imposed liability of tax amounting to Rs.83,30,8721- upon the petitioner. The 2 apptication for reotification made by the pe{tioner w 27.02.71025 has been rejected by the impugned order dated 18.1L.2025 confirming the tax liability upon it. Apart from grounds on merit relating to the levy of the liability, a plea has been taken that while passing the rectification order, no notice was issued upon the petitioner. However, as rightly pointed out by leamed Special Govemment Pleader for State Tax, under Section 161, 3'd proviso of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, notice or opportumf of hearing is required only when an order adverse to the assessee is going to be passed. In this case, the Proper Officer has not interfered with the order-in-original and there was no enhancement of the liability which necessitated any opportunity by way of show cause or notice upon the petitioner.

3.

In these circumstances, the petitioner is allowed liberty to approach the appellate authority with statutory deposit taking all grounds of law and fact as available to it to assail the impugned orders. If such an application is made, the respondents authority would consider the question of delay taking into account that the rectification application of the petitioner was pending before the Proper Officer till 18.11.2025 and thereafter petitioner has pursued the remedy before the writ Court also for some time. It would be open for the appeltate authority to take the decision on merits thereafter in accordance with law.

4.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as r to costs

3 Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ' .;.,. -"1" ;. r. . A,H.S.GOtvRl //II SHANI(AR REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To TKS 1 Thr: Assistant Commissioner State Tr?X, Saroornaqa Saroornagar Office of the Assistant issioner,Stiate Tax floor Gaganvihar Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad r

2.

Division, Hyderabad. Thr: State tax officer (ST), Saroornagar-3 Circle, 2nd TG-500001 g. Lh,? Principal Secretgfy, Revenue (CT) Department, Telangana Secretiariat, Hylerabad, State of Telanqana.

4.

Thr: secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001

5.

Thr: Chairman, Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs. Minisirv of Finance,.Department of Revenue, North Btock, Central Secrtjtariit, iilew Oettri 6. one cc to sRl VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR, Advocate topuc'l :

7.

ONE CC tO SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL'GOW PI.EAOEN'FOR STAT^E_TAX IOPUCI 8. one cc to sRl N.BHUJANGA RAo, DEpury soLrcrroR GENERAL oF TND|A IoPUCJ -.---

9.

One CC to SRI DOMIN|C FERNANDES, SC FOR CBIC tOpUCI 10.Two CD Copies PSK. )W. \

/ F HIGH COURT DATE D:25103 l,2026 ORDE,R WP.Nrc.8699 of 2026 toR THE S o t1'. 'l--t :. LJ.. 2 4 Apfr zll.z6 t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHICUT COSTS * * rO r4 \0 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.