M/S. Sri Sai Srinivasa Alluminium Industry vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

WP/11355/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01022810202517 April 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI M. V. L. NARASIMHA RAO, 5fi*iff, """1Hi3ti;$HJ6#.e:H"", Xl, J3uliffittf."j_, 3itsffi lvJli, ?1., fi iH"JlJ;i;351""fl 3[[.5, 1.&IE?iESEN'NGsR

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, a taxpayer, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated June 16, 2023, passed by the first respondent (an authority under the CGST Act). The impugned order, issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, demanded a total of Rs. 4,27,276/- (CGST and SGST) and imposed penalties of Rs. 42,737/- each (CGST and SGST) under Section 73(9) of the GST Act for the financial year 2021-22. The petitioner contended that the order was unsigned, illegal, unjustified, and violative of natural justice. The petition also sought a stay on further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order. The State of Telangana and the Union of India were the other respondents. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner sought permission to withdraw it.

Held

The Court, upon considering the submissions, allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The Court noted that the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to file a properly constituted petition. The other side (respondents) had no objection to this request. Consequently, the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for. No costs were awarded. Any pending interlocutory applications were also closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 16.06.2023, passed by the first respondent under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, demanding Rs. 4,27,276/- (CGST and SGST) and imposing penalties of Rs. 42,737/- each (CGST and SGST) under Section 73(9) of the GST Act for the financial year 2021-22, is illegal, unjustified, and violative of the principles of natural justice due to being unsigned. Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was unsigned, rendering it illegal, unjustified, and a violation of natural justice. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a properly constituted petition. Revenue/State's contentions: The respondents did not object to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 73(9)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

t 34461 HrGH couRr .?T l+t8li;t^st TELANGANA (SPeciai Original Jurisdiction; -iit'+I35SiY,.XIF,HE','#ffi entu PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING_CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HoNouRA"'-t'#'i"TlcE RENUKA YARA THU TITION NO: 1135soF 2025 WRIT PE Between: SY.No.183' Nagrreot 508285 "'Plnno*en ^-?.xr***r:*1"*T;."TiL%['r-,]:H$IS5X!'u"et-RPRoadcircre' 2 The state of rerangana, Represented by its principar secretary, (Revenue)' - seireiariat, HYderabad' ' Y#"Jig,l1ia;:",1r'#'r:f,r",'"",i:U;ltlr'17,$ tl'i"1l?'";'fi3i1"ffi1t or rndia' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to is, therefore, prayed that the Writ or direction' more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus' declaring the impugned order dated 16'06'2023 passed by the 1"t respondent under Section 73 of the CGST Act' 2017 in ref' No' ZD36O623o24i8gC demanding an amount of Rs'4'27'276I-CGST and ;;,;;;;, sGST and also imposition or penaltv or Rs'42'737t- cGSr and Rs.42,737r_sGST under section 73(9) of the .GST Ac', 2017 for the financial year 2O21-22 being un-signed' as illegal' unjustified besides being violative of principles of natural justice' IANO:1 OF2025 petition ur der Section 1 51 cpc praying that in the circun.rstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the writ petition, the High court n.ray be preased to stay a' further pror:eedings pursuant to the impugned order r.rated 16.06.2023 passed by the l sr rerspondent under Section Z3 of the CGST Act., 2O1l inref. No. 2D36062302418gc for the financiar year 2021-22 during the cendency of the above writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI M. V. L. NARASIMHA RAO 5fi*iff ,"""1Hi3ti;$HJ6#.e:H"",Xl,J3uliffittf."j_ 3itsffi lvJli,?1.,fi iH"JlJ;i;351""fl 3[[.5,1.&IE?iESEN'NGsR,

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON,BLE THD ACTING CTIIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HoN'BLE srvrt' JustlcE RENUI{A YARA WRIT PETITION No. 113 ORDER petitioner; Government Pleader rePresenting learned SPecial Government 55of2025 Pleader for State Sri B. Mukherjee' Sri SwarooP Oorilla' Tax, for (Per the Hon'ble the Achng Chief Justice Sujog Paul)" SriM.V.L.NarasimhaRao,learnedcounselforthe Sri T. Chaitanya Kiran' learned Assistant learned respondent Nos'l and 2 counsel rePresenting Sri and Gadi Praveen Kttmar' learned Deputy Solicitor General of India' for respondent No'3'

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a properly constituted petition' ?) \-) The other side has no objectron'

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for' No costs.

Irrte,riocutory applications, if any pendi,rg, shall also stand closrecl. AS . L. VIJAYA LAXM //II S\TANT REGISTRAR

One CC to Sri M. V. L Narasimha Rao, Advocate [OpUC SECTION OFFICER

Two CC.to The SpECtAL GP for State Tax, High Court for the State of 1j To, TJ I Telano

One 6 UTJ n Kum ana at rabadIo C to Sri i Pravee ar D CopieS , Deputy Solicitor General of lndia[OpUCJ Hyde Gad

Two C LS F+- i I

HIGH COURT DATED:17 tO4t2O2S ORDER WP.No.11355 rcf 2O2S DISMISSING TI{E WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS +(p64 SN t i) k 0 5 ilA)', 2025 oo t :,.] (-^ * plT(t.

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.