M/S. Shree Kalka Cotton Corporation vs. The Assistant Commissioner St
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Shree Kalka Cotton Corporation, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana challenging a show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated January 31, 2024, and an order in DRC-07 dated May 1, 2024. Both were issued by the Assistant Commissioner ST, Adilabad Circle, under the CGST/TGST Act, 2017. The petitioner sought to declare these notices and orders as void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of constitutional articles. The tax period in dispute was 2018-19, and an interlocutory application was filed seeking a stay on the operation of the DRC-07 order. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner ST and the State of Telangana.
Held
The Court did not decide the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a properly constituted petition. The other side had no objection to this request. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for. No costs were awarded. The interlocutory application, if any pending, was also closed. The specific grounds of challenge raised by the petitioner regarding the validity and constitutionality of the show cause notice and order were not adjudicated upon.
Key Issues
1. Whether the show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 31.01.2024 and the order in DRC-07 dated 01.05.2024, issued by the 1st Respondent under the provisions of CGST/TGST Act, 2017, are void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and without authority of law, and consequently violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned show cause notice and order were illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions. They sought to set aside any action taken pursuant to these notices. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue or state respondents regarding the merits of the case. However, they were represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
rw ': -: -*/ THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CIIIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION No.1O898 of 2O25 ORDER (Per the Hon'ble tlp Acting Chief Justice Sujog PauI): Sri V. Veeresham, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for the respondents 2 l.earned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw this Writ Petition with liberty to file a properly constituted petition. J The other side has no objection. I I I I 4 Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. .A. SRINIVASA REDDY SI TANT REGISTRAR //// SECTION OFFICER To, 3 BM LS 1 2 One CC to SRl. V. VEERESHAM, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER ,High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies I
HIGH COURT DATED:1 510412025 -.' . 'r ":- t7 .J \.\_ (- iF5 lnt' ,' ?o h ' ,// ORDER WP.No.1089t] of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS b ?,( 6
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.