M/S. Dream INDIA Legacy Developers Private Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, including Rabbit Digital Branding Solutions and M/s Dream India Legacy Developers Private Limited, filed writ petitions before the Telangana High Court challenging show cause notices and consequential orders issued by various State Tax authorities. These notices and orders pertained to the financial year 2018-19 and 2019-20. The petitioners sought to declare these notices and orders as void, illegal, arbitrary, violative of constitutional provisions and principles of natural justice. They also sought to revoke any bank attachments made pursuant to these actions. The State Tax authorities, represented by the Special Government Pleader, were the respondents. The matters were heard analogously due to the similarity of issues.
Held
The Court held that the impugned show cause notices and consequential orders in all the writ petitions were to be set aside. This decision was based on the submission by both the petitioners and the respondents that these notices and orders were unsigned. The Court found this to be a sufficient ground for setting them aside, referencing a previous common order passed in similar writ petitions. Consequently, any bank attachments made pursuant to these unsigned notices and orders were also revoked. The Court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The respondents were granted liberty to issue fresh show cause notices or orders in accordance with the law, and the limitation period would not be a hurdle for them in undertaking this fresh exercise. The writ petitions were disposed of accordingly, with no costs awarded.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned show cause notices and consequential orders are void, illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, and 265 of the Constitution of India, and principles of natural justice, and without authority of law, as argued by the petitioners? 2. Whether the bank attachments made pursuant to the impugned notices and orders should be revoked? The petitioners argued that the impugned notices and orders were unsigned, rendering them void and liable to be set aside. They relied on a common order previously passed by the High Court in similar matters. The respondents, the State Tax authorities, did not present any arguments against setting aside the unsigned notices and orders, as indicated by their submission that the matters could be decided based on the common order.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER
ffi'w "./ t" THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL rHE H.N,BLE sMr.til3;mr RENUKA 'ARA \ UrRIT PETITION Nos. 16689 1S804 18825 and 18832 of 2025 COMMON ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting ChieJ'Justice Sujoy paut) Learned co-ygs61 ..Sri K.N.Nishanth Rao and Sri M.Naga Deepak for the petitioners and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for State Tax.
Regard being had to the similitude of the questions involved, on the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are aralogously heard ald decided by this common order.
Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax submitted that since the impugned notice(s) and order(s) are unsigned, the same may be set aside in view of the common order passed in W.P.No.21 101 of 2024 & batch, dated 28.02.2025
Accordingly, the impugried notice(s) and order(s) in these Writ Petitions are set aside. The consequential bank attachment(s), if any, shall also stand revoked. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to issue fresh show cause notice(s)/ order(s) in 2 accordance \ rith 1aw and, for undertaking this exercise afresh, the limitation will not be a hurdle for the respondents.
The Writ Petitions are disposed of without expressing an1. opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed 4- To 8. KKS PVL N. SRIHARI PUTY REGISTRAR //// ECTION OFFICER
The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Basheerbagh - I Circle, Abids Circle, Telangana
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, State of Telangana, C.T. Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad- 500001
The Branch lvlanager, State Bank of lndia (Banjara Hills Branch), Banjara Hills, Road No.12, Hyderabad.
The Principal Secretary to Government Revenue Department (Commercial Tax), Hyderabad, Telangana
The State Tax Officer, Medak, Nizamabad, Telangana.
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, State of Telangana, C.T. Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad- 500001
The Deputy Commissioner (ST), Malakpet - ll Circle, Charminar Division, Hyderabad, Telangana
The Deputy Commissioner (ST), Charminar STU - 1, Charminar, Telangana
One CC to SRl. NISHANTH RAO KN Advocate IOPUC]
One CC to SRl. M NAGA DEEPAK Advocate [OPUC]
One CC to SRl. SWAROOP OORILLA Special Govt Pleader for State Tax loPUCl Two CD Copies II
a HIGH COURT DATED:1010il202s 't rlL ST4f6' f,* Y ($ ifI,\:') ,, '\i zsJlJt M i) -ri, .;r COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.l6689, 18804, IB1ZS and 1g832 ot 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS 1 \\ K ,a ", .,/
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.