M/S. Sai Earth Movers vs. The State Of Telangana

WP/15565/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01028907202517 June 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sai Earth Movers, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order (DRC-07) and its attachment, dated June 11, 2024, passed by the 2nd Respondent (Assistant Commissioner (ST), Enforcement, Enforcement Wing-2, Hyderabad) for the period 2019-20. The petitioner contended that the assessment order, show cause notice (DRC-01A), and the summary of the order (DRC-07) were invalid as they were not electronically generated with DINs and lacked signatures, either manual or digital. This, the petitioner argued, violated principles of natural justice. The respondents are the State of Telangana and the Union of India, along with various tax authorities. An interlocutory application was also filed seeking a stay on further proceedings.

Held

The Court held that the impugned notice and order were to be set aside. The reasoning was based on the submission made by both the petitioner and the respondents, acknowledging that the impugned notice and order were unsigned. This was in line with a common order previously passed by the Court in a batch of writ petitions (W.P.No.21101 of 2024 & batch, dated February 28, 2025). The Court explicitly stated that the writ petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. Liberty was granted to the respondents to issue a fresh show cause notice or order to the petitioner in accordance with law. For the purpose of undertaking this fresh exercise, the limitation period would not be a hurdle for the respondents. The interlocutory applications, if any, were also closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order and related notices issued under the GST Acts, 2017, are invalid for want of electronically generated DINs and signatures (manual or digital), thereby violating principles of natural justice? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned assessment order and its attachments were invalid because they were not generated with electronically generated Document Identification Numbers (DINs) and lacked signatures, either manually or digitally. This procedural defect rendered the orders void ab initio and violative of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner relied on a common order passed by the High Court in W.P.No.21101 of 2024 & batch, dated February 28, 2025, which apparently dealt with similar issues of unsigned notices and orders. Respondents' Arguments: The learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax submitted that since the impugned notice and order were unsigned, they may be set aside in view of the common order cited by the petitioner.

Sections Cited

Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT FOR THE ST r.o";,,i 6lE,3j l:lflif,fli Ar HyDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAI.TO nf.rU frrlyefrriv ft;" t34461 ...PETITIONER PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WR]T PETITION NO:1 5565 0F 202s Between: lV/s. Sai Earth Movers. I re ra ns a ns - !0s06i'ft;,?;'*J3;"#:fil.,3; o?*til:iirs.,IilI" ",, Nargo nda, AND 1. The State of Telanqana. E secretary, Hyderab-ad. )epartment of Revenue (c. T.) Rep. by its principal Bi8#osol"issioner of S'T - 5, Enforcement, Enforcemen t wing - 2, Assistant Commissioner (ST), Enforcement, Enforcemen tWing_ 2,Hyderabad State Tax Officer, Nalgonda_i , Nalgonda. U_nion of lndia. Rep. bv its prinninar qa^.^+^^, .r^. __ t or Finance. 3d Froor, i;#,?iy"fl Biilrlils3.",,j.1"ru# "**,Sl,lX,,l,,.i? ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0r the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particurarry in the nature of IVANDAMUS declaring that the impugned Assessment order in DRc_ 07 under section 73 and attachment to DRC-07 dated ,r 1.06.2024 passed by the 2nd Respondent for the period 20'1g-20 vide reference zD360'240ggg60U under GST Acts' 2017' without erectronicary generated DrNs and arso without the 2 4 J ! signature on show cause notice in DRC-0'1A and DRC-01 and summary of the order in DRC-07 and attachment to DRC- 07 either manually or digitally as invalid and deemed to have never issued' violative of the principles of natural justice arbitrary, capricious' and illegal' IANO:1 OF 2025 petition under Section r s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further Proceedings, including recovery of tax and penalty' pursuant to the impugned assessment order dated 11.06.2024 Passed bY the 2nd ResPondent vide reference 2D360824098860U for the Period 2019-20 respectively under CGST/SGST Act 2017 as otheMise the petitioner will be put irreparable loss and severe hardship' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR Counsel for the Respondents No'1 to 4: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA' sPEcl'Ail'eo#Rnnlter'rr pr-EaoeR FoRSTATE TAx Counsel for the Respondent No'5: SRI GAD^I-PRAVEEN KUMAR' ="'''-;;purY sollclroR GENERAL oF INDIA

The Court made the following: ORDER h

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CIIIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICD RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION .ls5 No 65ot 2o2s ORDER Sri B respondent No.5 (Per the Hon'bte the Acting Chief Justice Sujog paul) Sri Venkatram Reddy Mantur, learned counsel for the \ \ petitioner; Sri Swaroop Oorilla, iearned Special Pleader for State Tax, for respondent Nos. 1 Government to 4 and Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for I

Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Governmenr pleader for State Tax submitt"d , tJr.t since the impugned notice and order are unsigned, the same may be set aside in view of the common order passed in W.p.No.2l1O1 of 2024 & batch, dated 28.02.2025. 3. Accordingly, the impugned notice and order are set aside. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to issue fresh show cause notice/order to the petitioner in accordance with iaw ald, for -l 2 \ undertaking this exercise hurdle for the resPondents' afresh, the limitation will not be a 4. The Writ Petition is disposed of r'r'ithout expressing any opinion on the merits of the case' No costs' Interlocutory applications' it any pending' shall also stand closed' D'. B. REKHA RANI A ANT REGISTRAR ,ffRUE COPY// ECitotl orrtceR To, e Principal Secretary' State of Telangana' Department of Revenue (C' T )' )

Th 5, Enforcement' Enforcement wlng ) Hvderabad

The DePutY Commissioner of S T Enforcement Wing- 2' Hvd erabad 3T he Assistant Commissioner (ST), Enforcement' yderabad ax Officer, Nalgonda- 1 ' Nalgonda ecretary, Government of lndia, Minist{ of Finance, Union of 4. The State T lndia, 3 Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110 001 The PrinciPal S 'o Floor,

One CCto SRI VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR' Advocate [OPUCI

Two CCs to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPecial Government Pleader for StateTax, High Court for the State of Telangan a at HYderabad. [oUrl

One CC to SRI ioPUCl

Two CD CoPies trilP v,. - GJP Yer GADI PRAVEEN KUT\iIAR, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia H

HIGH COURT DATED:17 10612025 thlts:r-lt o y4 /) cf f'( I \' 18 sEP zffi * E.,- r: n r r.,,, ORDER WP.No.15565 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS *.odd #-"

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.