M/S. Sai Manasa Pharmaceuticals vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

WP/10675/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01021353202517 April 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sai Manasa Pharmaceuticals, filed a writ petition challenging an ex-parte assessment order dated 30-12-2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Khammam-II Circle, under Section 73 of the TGST and CGST Acts, 2017, for the financial year 2017-18. The petitioner contended that the assessment order lacked a mandatory electronically generated DIN, was unsigned, and was issued pursuant to a show cause notice that also lacked DIN and signature. Furthermore, the show cause notice was allegedly not physically served, and the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity for a personal hearing. The petitioner argued that the order was invalid, violative of natural justice principles, and contrary to Section 75(4) of the GST Acts, 2017.

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 liberty to file a properly constituted petition. The Court, in its order, noted this request and accordingly dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for. No order as to costs was made. The Court did not decide on the validity of the assessment order or the procedural irregularities alleged by the petitioner. The specific issues raised by the petitioner regarding the DIN, signature, service of notice, and personal hearing were not adjudicated upon.

Key Issues

1. Whether the ex-parte assessment order dated 30-12-2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) for the financial year 2017-18, is liable to be set aside for non-compliance with mandatory requirements such as the absence of a DIN and signature, and for violation of principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the non-service of the show cause notice and denial of a personal hearing, as per Section 73 and Section 75(4) of the TGST and CGST Acts, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was fundamentally flawed due to the absence of a DIN and signature, rendering it invalid and not an order in the eyes of the law. They contended that the non-service of the show cause notice and the failure to provide a personal hearing violated the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the GST Acts, 2017, making the ex-parte assessment illegal. The petitioner sought to have the order set aside. Respondents' Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (Assistant Commissioner (ST), State of Telangana, and Union of India).

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 75(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HONOURAEI.T SI#J:USTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION NO: 10675 OF 2025 [ 3446 ] .,.PETITIONER Between: M/s. Sai Manasa Pharmaceuticals, 10-2-125, Mamilgudem, Khammam, Khammarn District, Telangana 507001, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr. airram Srinivasa Rao, AND 1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Khammam-ll Circle, Warangal Division, H. NO. 10-6-179/6, Ground Floor, Near P.V. Narasimha Rao Park, Beside NSP Office, Bhuranpuram Street, Khammam 507001. 2. The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Revenue (CT) Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Telangana Secretariat Building, Hyderabad, Telangana. 3. The Union of lndia, rep. by its Secretary (Frnance), lVinistry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi 1'10001 RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia 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 particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS holding that the impugned Ex-Parte Assessment Order passed by the First Respondent vide DlN. GST/36ACVFS51SOG1ZB11B, dated 30- 12-2023, u/s. 73 of the TGST and CGST Acts,2017, for the F,Y. 2017-18, which does not contain the mandatory electronically generated DIN; which does not contain Signature/Digital Signature and is an unsigned order, and which was passed pursuant to Show Cause Notice which itself does not contain DIN and Signaturei Digital Signature, without physically.serving the Show Cause Notice on the Petitioner, without affording opportunity of personal hearing, and even on merits is invalid, deemed to have never been issued, not an order in the eye of law, violative of the principles of natural justice, contrary to S. 7 5(4) ot the GST Acts, 2017, contrary to law and illegal and consequerrtly set aside the same IANO:1O F 2025 Petition under sr-'ction 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitJired in supcort.of the. petition, ineiign court may oe pieaseo tJ jrant stay of all further proc,eedings, incruding '"""ou6ry of tax, interest ;and penatty, pursuant to the .impug")ed Ex-parte Assessment order passed ,y-tn"'First Respondent vide DrN. (iSI/36ACVFS5196c1zB/18, dated 30-12-20 ii, ,it". iz ot the TGST and CGST A<:|s,2017, for the F.y. 2017-1'B counsel for the Petitiorer: SRr G.N.G sHANKAR REPRESENTING FoR sRr. G NARENDRA CHETTY counsel for the Resporrcent Nos.1&2: SRr swARoop ooRrLLA Speciar Govt Pleader for State Tax 9o^yE"t for the Resporr,rent No.3: sRr B LAxMr PRASUNA (sc FoR CENTRAL GOVT)

The Court made the fol owing: ORDER l i i I I :

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND rxp nciw'gLo sMT. qusrlcE RENUI{A YARA WRIT PETITIO No.1O675 of2o.25 ORDER:' (Per the llory;ble the $ating Chie. f Ji,tsttce Sujog Paul). -i Sri G.N:G. Shankar, learned counsel appearing for Sri G.Narendra Chetty, learned'counsel for the petitioner, seeks to withdraw this r,r,rit petition w'ith the liberty to the petitioner to file a properl.r' constituted petition

Accordrngll . the s'rit pctrLiott rs dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty praved for. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, rf anv, shall stand closcd T. JAYASREE DEPUTY REGISTRAR //// sectiliorrrcea To,

Two CD Copies KKS LS

One CC to SRl. G NARENDRA CHETTY Advocate [OPUC]

One CC to SRl. B LAXMI PRASUNA (SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT) TOPUCI

Two CCs to GP for STATE TAX, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

HIGH COURT DATED:1710412025 ORDER WP.No.10675 of 2025 --'-:---' ,"': ,' -' '' t o Ac: .v :: ! \' ,, \.'- $* q .rlt 1,r,rrr ,,/ + 44 ?r/a,1?' DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

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.