M/S. Amma Constructions vs. Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Amma Constructions, represented by its partner, challenged notices and an assessment order issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST). The challenge pertains to the tax period 2019-20. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice, dated 15-07-2024, was issued beyond the limitation period, as it should have been issued on or before 31.05.2024. The assessment order, dated 23-08-2024, was also challenged on grounds of being barred by limitation and lacking physical or digital signatures, rendering it void ab initio and without jurisdiction. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare these actions null and void.
Held
The Court held that the matter was squarely covered by a recent order of the High Court in W.P.No.9924 of 2025, dated 03.04.2025. The Court noted that the show cause notice in the present case was issued on 15.07.2024 for the tax period 2019-20, whereas it should have been issued on or before 31.05.2024. Based on this admission and the previous order, the Court set aside the impugned assessment order dated 23.08.2024. The Court explicitly stated that the Writ Petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs were awarded.
Key Issues
1. Whether the show cause notice issued on 15.07.2024 for the tax period 2019-20 is barred by limitation under the CGST Act, 2017 and TGST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the assessment order dated 23.08.2024, issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 and TGST Act, 2017, is void ab initio, without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law due to being barred by limitation and lacking proper signatures? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was issued beyond the prescribed limitation period, which is 31.05.2024 for the tax period 2019-20. They further contended that the assessment order, lacking physical or digital signatures, was void ab initio, without jurisdiction, and illegal. The petitioner relied on the principle that actions taken beyond limitation are invalid. Respondents' Contentions: The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the parties jointly admitted that the matter was covered by a previous order of the High Court.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
\
THE HON,BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION I{o.11436 of 20.25 ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Actirq Chief Justkn SujoA Paul): Sri Puppala Bharath Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for the respondents.
With the consent, finally heard
At the outset, learned counsel for the parties fairly admitted that this matter is squarely covered by recent order of this Court in W.P.No.9924 of 2025, dated 03.04.2025. The show-cause notice in the instant case 'v\ras issued on 15.07.2024 for the tax period 2O79-2O, whereas it could have only been issued on or before 31.O5.2O24. 4. In view of candid statement made by learned counsel for the parties and also the order passed by this Court in the aJoresaid case. The impugned assessment order dated 23.08.2024 is set aside.
Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of without I I expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs.
2 Interlocur,o:-z applications, if any pending, sha[ aiso stand closed. //// N. SRIHARI DEPU]Y REGISTRAR i ISECTION OFFICER To, KKS LS \n-
The Assis;ta nt ()ommissioner (ST), Madhapur - 6 Circle, Madhapur Division, Hyderabad Z. Jf,g Principal S ecretary, Revenue Department (Commercial Taxes), Telangana :Ser retariat, Hyderabad.
One CC tc Slil PUPPALA BHARATH NANDAN Advocat,: [OPUC]
Two CCs to G r for STATE TAX, High Court for the State of Tr:langana at Hyderabad. [Or.JT]
Two CD Copie-':;
t I J HIGH COURT DATED:291Ct412025 ORDER WP.No.11436 oI 2025 DISPOSING T;{E WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (+ <K<'=i 2 s14 s J o z C) t oo 1 M JUt'| r9 \-^^,',,-- 1.,.,} l 2^ (' )J
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.