M/S Orange Tours And Travels vs. M/S Pnb Housing Finance LTD

WP/10920/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01021886202510 April 2025Bench: MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA,B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI J.PRABHAKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR, SRI PODILA HARI PRASAD

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Orange Tours and Travels, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 27.04.2024 (Form GST DRC-07) issued by Respondent No. 1 under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, for the period 2018-19. The petition also challenged a Show Cause Notice in DRC-01 dated 07.06.2022 and a notice in FORM GST DRC-13 dated 09.01.2025 issued by the Commercial Taxes Department under Section 79(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended these actions were void, illegal, and passed without jurisdiction due to a lack of signatures. The petitioner sought to declare these orders null and void and stay coercive recovery steps for Rs. 17,18,532/-. The petitioner later filed two memos stating that the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Kolkata, would not be functioning until 15.04.2025, and that the petitioner needed urgent relief concerning a notice to vacate scheduled property.

Held

The High Court did not delve into the merits of the case concerning the GST notices or the alleged lack of signatures. The Court granted interim relief to the petitioner solely based on the petitioner's submissions that the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) would not be functioning until 15.04.2025, and that the petitioner required urgent relief due to a notice to vacate scheduled property. The Court noted that the petitioner had already filed an appeal before the DRAT on 09.04.2025, challenging an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, Hyderabad, on 07.04.2025. Consequently, the High Court deemed it fit to dispose of the writ petition as the petitioner had availed the statutory remedy by filing an appeal before the competent authority. The interim relief granted was protection from coercive action until 15.04.2025.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 27.04.2024, Show Cause Notice dated 07.06.2022, and Notice dated 09.01.2025, issued under Sections 73 and 79(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, are void, illegal, and without jurisdiction due to a lack of physical or digital signatures, thereby violating principles of natural justice. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders and notices were non-est in law and passed without authority as they lacked the requisite signatures, rendering them illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice. They sought to have these actions declared null and void. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments presented by the respondents regarding the validity of the notices or the allegations of lack of signatures.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 79(1)

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 TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HONOURABLE JUSTTCE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN R,AO WRlT PETITION NO: 10920 OF 2025 [ 344s 1 ...PETITIONER Between: M/s Orange Tours and Travels, Represented by its Proprietor Siaik Kaleem S/o Shai( Mahaboob Aged about 44 Years, Occ.Business Sl,op [o 9, H.No.1-7-194l'195, Viihwam Building, Paradise Circle, S.D Road, Secunderabad AND 1. M/s PNB Housing Finance Ltd, Represented by its Authorized Officer B.V. Raju Bhavan, 4th- Floor 8-2-269l4lCandD, Near Sagar Society Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034 2. M/s Vishwa Shdnti Enterprises, Represented by its Partners having their Office at Premises No. 197/D, S.D Road Secunderabad, Telangana 3. Sri. K. Madhukar Rao, S/o Late K. Vishwanatham Aged about. 68 Yrs., Occ Managing Partner M/s Vishwa Shanthi Enterprises 4. Smt. K. Sarita, Wo Sri. K. Madhukar Rao Aged about . 65 yrs., Occ. Housewife The Respondents 3 and 4 are Rl/o H. No. 16-6-687, Near Darbar Maisamma Temple, Kali Khabar, Chaderghat, Hyderabad, Telangana 5. Mr. Proddaturi Anish Kumar, S/o Sri. P. SriHari, Aged about 33 Years, Occ. Business 6. Smt. Proddaturi Ramya, Wo Mr. P. Anish Kumar Aged about 33 Years, Occ' Business The Respondents 5 and 6 are R/o Plot No. D1212, Yikarampuri Colony, Karkhana, Secunderabad-50000g ...RES'ONDENTS 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 a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring (i) lmpugned Order dated 27.04.2024 along with FORM GST D.RC-07 daied 27.O4.2024 bearing Reference No.2D3604240669046 issued by the Respondent No. 1 under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the period 2018-19 and (ii) Show Cause Notice issued in DRC-01 dated 07.06.2022 (iii) Notice issued in FORM GST DRC - 13 dated 09.01 .2025 issued by the Commercial Taxes Department under Section 79(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, as null and void, illegal, in violation of principles of natural justice, without jurisdiction as it is passed without authority of law, and non-est in law on account of the lack of signatures either physically or digitatly in the interest of justice and equity, and in accordance with the scheme of the GST Acts. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay (i) the impugned Orders dated 27.04.2024 bearing Reference No. 2D3604240669046, (ii) Notice issued in FORM GST DRC - 13 dated 09.01.2025, and any coercive steps towards recovery of Rs. 17,18,532/- against the petitioner by the Respondents pursuant to the impugned Orders dated 27.04.2024 and the bank attachment notice dated 09.01.2025. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.PRABHAKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI PODILA HARI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: -

The Gourt made the following: ORDER

I { THE HON'BLE WSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA - AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO - WRIT PETITION No.1O92O OF 2o.25 / Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.J.Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petiLioner. ORDER: Qter Justice Mouslatmi Bhattactnrya) The petitioner has filed 2 Memos signed by counsel for the petitioner dated O9.04.2025 and 10.O4.2025 enclosing a Notice of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata ('DRATJ dated 18.O3.2025 stating that the DRAT" is holding "Camp Court" at Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guhwati ort 07.O4.2025 ar'.d- 08.O4.2025. 2. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner relies on the later Memo dated 10.04.2025 to say that the DRAT is not functioning today by reason of public hoiiday and that the Chairperson of the DRAT is on leave tomorrow t.e., 1L.04.2025 and the DRAT is not functioning tlll 15.04.2025 by reason of public holidays.

We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case. The only reason for granting any form of interim relief to the petitioner is by reason bf 2 Memos filed by the petitioner stating that the DRAT will not be functioning till 15.04.2O25 and the petitioner needs urgent relief in terms of a Notice asking the'petitioner to vacate the scheduled property. t D

2 MB,J & BR R,J W.P.No.1O92o o! 2025

We hence grant interim relief to the petitioner in the form of the petitioner being protected from any kind of coercive action from the respondents till 1 5.04.2025-

We are informed that the petitioner has already filed an Appeal before the DRAT on O9.O4.2O25 from the impugned order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, at Hyderabad on 07.04.2025. We

hence deem it fit to dispose of the Writ Petition since the petitioner has filed the statutory appeal before the competent authority.

W.P.No. 1092O of 2025 is accordingly did'posed of in terms of the above Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs L.LAKSHMIBABU DE UTY REGISTRAR F I' \, //// One CC to SRI PODILA HARI PRASAD, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies IECTION OFFICER To 1 2 PSK. I

HIGH COURT DATED:1010412025 ORDER WP.No.10920 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS CC TODAY ,,-rE S TA 16: 1 5+ x 1) q J 10 APn 2[6 :')l !.- /,/i' ,t^ \. ,._;, )1 ,-1, . ,, | .\" i'' \

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.