M/R. Srikanth Bashetty vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

WP/12044/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01024147202510 June 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Bhashyam Builders (P) Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an unsigned show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated June 20, 2024, and a corresponding demand order in Form DRC-07 dated July 12, 2023. These were issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad (Respondent No. 1) under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the financial year 2019-2020. The demand was for SGST of Rs. 52,402/- and CGST of Rs. 52,402/-, totaling Rs. 1,04,804/-. The petitioner sought to declare these notices and orders void, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction, alleging violations of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India. They also sought to stay the operation of the demand order.

Held

The Court did not delve into the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to file a properly constituted petition. The Court, in its order, allowed this request. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty granted to the petitioner. No order as to costs was made. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed. The Court did not decide on the validity of the show cause notice or the demand order, nor did it address the constitutional arguments raised by the petitioner.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 20.06.2024, being unsigned, is void, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction, violating Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India, as argued by the petitioner. 2. Whether the demand order in Form DRC-07 dated 12.07.2023, issued pursuant to the unsigned show cause notice, is also void, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction, as argued by the petitioner. The petitioner contended that the unsigned show cause notice rendered the entire proceedings, including the subsequent demand order, illegal and violative of constitutional provisions. The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

Sections Cited

Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Division -Malkaigiri Circle -KEESARA-l I [ 3446 ] 44 oF2o25 cretary to Government Revenue d, Telangana' .....RESPONDENTS H I GH co u Rr "^T l['#Itl'^q :- ::::- " ^- ^ tsP"tii'cj Jisi;'l J urisdiction) iv,%'?llJ$=-$J5iiI'3f".,HUE THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA PRESENT loN NO: wRlTPETtT 120 Between: H{s,:?Iff }J,?31'^1il"^ff $'tr''i^g[r'?"'5]'?JJ:""i't'*':::*:-- AND 1 2 The Assistant Commissioner (ST)' Hyderabad -500001' State of Telangana' Through Principal Se B5;;il;;ili;mmerciar rax)' Hyderaba Petition Under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order' or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of tvlandamus (i) d-eclaring un signed Show cause notice in Form DRC 01 20.06.2[24vide Ref no' 2D36O622O90 3 231 and the corresponding demand order in Form DRC-07 dated ot iz zO23 vide Ref no' 2D3612230131352 passed by the Respondent No.1 under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act' 2O17 for the Financial Year 2019-2020 ' demanding an amount of SGST Rs 52,402t-, CGST Rs 52,4021- both issued by the Respondent No l under the provisions of CGST/TGS f Act' 2017 as being void' arbitrary' illegal' without .jurisdiction and without authority of law apart f rom being violative of Articles 14' 1g(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia' and to consequently set aside any action taken Hon'ble Court violative of arti t.A.NO:1 OF 20 Plrsuant thereto and pass may deem r.,, "ro o;;;',] lr.n rrnnu. or orher or ures 14, t9(t)(g), r, "no ri)nl.ircrm.t"n""'"'"-'t!rde(s) as this ,2s )5 of the con"t,trtio"n"ortr re case. (ii) and petition Under St the arridavit ,,"; ,; ;::ln.1sl cPc pravins tha or operation or irpron]1 ,or trre petitiJn."il;;t in the circumstances stated in 2D361223013r:sz ortuld^fn''nn"o .lrr;':: ""'* r'nav be Pleased to 516v period 2o1e-2o,rro"..Jil^"," '"'"0;;;r""' in DRc-07 vide Rer no' perition, as orherwise, ,n"l"lot, ^.,.lrrlr"J"le Respondent No 1 ror the tax : pettioner -,;;,;:::* disposar or the above writ counser for the petitioner : spr /: - ^ - _. ""' - severe ross and hardship. counser for the Responr,t' t*' G'R's'AKH'LE.WAR rhe court made the ,",,"j;';"::::'^t covr PLEADER FoR srArE rAx THE HON,BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL rHE H'N'BLE sMr'3X3"'t' REN,KA YARA TPETITION No. L2044of 2025 WRT (Per the Hon'bte the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul) Sri G.R.S.Akhileswar' learned counsel for the petitioner' seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition with the iiberty to the petitioner to file a properlY constituted petition' 2. Accordingly' the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty prayed for' No orcier as to costs' Miscellaneouspetitionspelrding,ifany,shallstandclosed. "'A3i3tR$Ii33'tt[t[ ,/ //rRuE coPY/' ,u"ffiror.,"r* '"1iu1":":iitiii?t'f,&tfff p",=fl ::::H":i-''"c'u.f 'r'ihe 2- One CC to SRI G SA GJP Two CD CoPies ORDER: w // ll HIGH COURT DATED:10 tOOt2Ozs

WP.No.12044 of 2O2S DISMISSING THE W.P AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS. :.) 1 0 s[P 2025 r,,O .rcd \0-(4f 1..9 i i/1-

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.