M/S. Mangalya Shopping Mall vs. Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)

WP/3784/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01007596202521 April 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Mangalya Shopping Mall, challenged a show cause notice dated 29.11.2024 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax) under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Telangana GST Act, 2017. The notice pertained to the tax period 2020-21 and was alleged to be without jurisdiction, in contravention of a notification, vitiated by bias, and barred by limitation. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondent authority passed a final order/Order-In-Original dated 21.02.2025. The petitioner's counsel then sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge the fresh order in appropriate proceedings.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition should be dismissed as withdrawn. This decision was based on the petitioner's prayer to withdraw the petition with the liberty to challenge the subsequent Order-In-Original dated 21.02.2025. The Court noted that the final order had been passed during the pendency of the writ petition, rendering the challenge to the show cause notice moot. The reasoning was that the petitioner wished to pursue a fresh course of action by challenging the definitive order rather than the preliminary notice. The respondents had no objection to this course of action. The Court granted the liberty as prayed for by the petitioner. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the primary action was the dismissal of the petition as withdrawn.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the subsequent Order-In-Original. This issue arises from the petitioner's request to withdraw the current petition after a final order was passed, and the respondents' lack of objection. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that since a final order has been passed subsequent to the filing of the writ petition challenging the show cause notice, the current petition should be withdrawn with liberty to pursue appropriate remedies against the new order. This would allow them to challenge the final adjudication, which supersedes the initial show cause notice. Respondents' Argument: The respondents, represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax and the Deputy Solicitor General of India, did not object to the petitioner's request for withdrawal with liberty to file fresh proceedings. They implicitly agreed to the dismissal of the current writ petition on this basis.

Sections Cited

Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 3446 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD' (SPeciat Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION NO: 3784 oF 2025 Between: M/s. Mangalya Shopping Mall, rep. by its Partner' Mr- .Kasam Mallikarjun' 60 i;iii, l-t-ai l t4-l i, ftaniNasri, tia nuhakond a-506 00 1, warans al District' ...PETITIONER AND.t. Assistant commissioner (state Tax), Ramgopalpet-Ranigunj-1 circle, BegumPet Division, HYderabad. 2. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Telangana State' 3.stateofTelangana,rep.byitsChiefsecretaryandSpecial.ChiefSecretaryto " c;;il'.";ItFncl, stlte fax Department, s6cretariat' Hvderabad' 4. Union of lndia, rep. by its Secretary' Vili-t!ry^gf- Finance' Jeevan Deep eLjifOing, 3rd Fl6or, 'saniad Marg' New Delhi-'l 10 001' .,.RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstancesstat.edintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue a Writ of Prohibition or any other appropriate writ or order or directionrestrainingthelStRespondentfromproceedingwiththeadjudication under the show cause notice dated 29'11'2024 issued by the 1st Respondent under Section- 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act' 2017 and the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2O17 for the tax period 2020-21 on accountofbeingwithoutjurisdiction,incontraventionofNotificationNo.l0of 2017 issued by the 3rd Respondent and also vitiated by apparent bias and as being barred by limitation and contrary to the scheme of the CGST Acl' 2017 ' IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition u r'ie r Section 1 5 1 cpc praying that in the c ir:u.nstances stated in the affidavit firecl rr support of the writ petition, the High cctrrt may be preased to grant interim s:a r of afi further proceedings pursuant to *re mpugned show cause notice dated i:g.11.2024 issued by the 1st Respondent fcr the tax period 2020-21 , pendin(r cJ :oosar of the writ petition as otherwise th(l t;,etitioner wifl be put to severe rosr; a r.l hardship. Counsel for the [)et tioner: Ms. AKRUTI AGARWAL, REp. SRI KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Res :ondent No.1 to 3: SRI SWAROOP OORILI_A. SPL GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Res,rondents: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUry SOLICITOR GENERIAL OF INDIA

The Court made the 'ollowing: ORDER

7 THE HON,BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITI ON No.3784 of 2O2S ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Stloy Paul) Ms.Akruti Agarwal, learned counsel representing Sri Karthik Ramarra Puttamreddy, Iearned counsel for the petitioner ' and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for the resPondents.

This petition assails the show-cause notice' But, during the pendency of petition, the iinal order/ Order-In-Original, dated 2t.O2.2025, has been Passed.

Lear-ned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of this petition with the liberty to challenge the fresh order in appropriate fresh proceedings.

The other side has no objection'

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn' with the liberty prayed for. There shall be no order as to costs' Interlocutory glgligetio"q { fry nenlin g- shal,!-rstand closed. L. VIJAYA LAXMI SISTANT REGISTRAR //// SECTION OFFICER To,

One CC to SRI KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMRE Y, Advocate [OPUC]

One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERIAL OF lNDIA, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OPUC]

Two CCs to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL GP FOR STATE TAX' High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI

Two CD Copies BSR rt A LS (fi---- .L \

HIGH COURT DATED:21rc4t2025 ORDER WP.No.3784 ,rf 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRPWN, WITHOUT CCISTS .'f tt 2ri tI T S t: k (\( r,' ',lii L tttt .==-' o I -1 ).;:., p,,1r (+ TI,f

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.