M/S. Mpm Ventures Private Limited vs. Commissioner Of Customs And Central Tax (Appeals-I)

WP/2202/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01003990202509 April 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI MD SHABAZ, counser ror the Respont"*, H'l:?1;3i;'lHYtkffi-DES, Sr.sc FoR cBrcFor Respondent: SRI MUKHERJEE, rep., SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR., DY.SO.GEN

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

M/s. MPM Ventures Private Limited (the Petitioner) filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court challenging an Order-in-Appeal dated January 12, 2024, passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax (Appeals-I) (Respondent No. 1). The Petitioner sought to declare the said order void, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction. The petition also prayed for a stay on the operation of the impugned order. The respondents included various GST authorities and the Union of India. The matter was listed for hearing before the High Court.

Held

The Court noted that during the hearing, the learned counsel for the parties agreed that certain grounds taken in the appeal memo had not been considered by the appellate authority. Consequently, they agreed that the appellate order dated January 12, 2024, could be set aside and the matter remitted back to the appellate authority for a rehearing of the petitioner and a fresh order. The Court accepted this consensus. The impugned order of the appellate authority dated January 12, 2024, was set aside. The Petitioner was directed to appear before the appellate authority on April 21, 2025, at 11:30 AM. The appellate authority was instructed to rehear the petitioner and pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs were awarded.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-GST-HYC-APPI-COMMR.-011-23-24 dated 12-01-2024, passed by the Respondent No. 1 under the provisions of the CGST/TGST Act, 2017, is void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that certain grounds raised in their appeal memo were not considered by the appellate authority. They sought to set aside the impugned order and have the matter reheard. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue side regarding the merits of the case. However, the parties, including the revenue's counsel, agreed to a course of action.

Sections Cited

CGST/TGST Act, 2017

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 3446 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITiON NO: 2202 OF 2025 Between: M/s. MPM Ventures Private Limited, 8-3-323, Yellareddyguda, Ameerpet, u D yderabad, Telangana- 500 073. Represented by tr/r. Girish l\Iallpani, Managing irector, S/o Raj Kumar Malpani, aged 47 years, residing at Flat No.2104 and 2204, SR The First, Gachibowli, K.V.Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500032. D ...PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax (Appeals-l), GST Bhavan, L.B Stadium Road. Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 -004 2. Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, L B Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004 3. Principal Commissioner of CentraI Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, L B Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 O04 4. The Superintendent, Anti Evasion, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, L B Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004 5. Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Represented by its Secretary North Block, New Delhi - 110 001 ...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 a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring i. impugned Order-ln-Appeal No. HYD-GST-HYC- APPI-COMMR.-011-23-24 dated 12-01-2024 passed by the Respondent No. 1 under the provisions of CGST/TGST Act, 2O17 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law, apart from being violative of 1 7 Articlesr4,19(1Xer)and265oftheConstitutionoflndia'andtocrnsequentlySet aside the same lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition unde- Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrslances stated in the affidavit filed irr srrpport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay operation of impulrned order-ln-Appeal No. HYD-GST-HYC APF',1-coMlvR.011- 23-24 daled 12-01-i'.o24 passed by the Respondent No. '1 ' Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MD SHABAZ counser ror the Respont"* H'l:?1;3i;'lHYtkffi-DES, Sr.sc FoR cBrc Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI MUKHERJEE, rep., P SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR., DY.SO.GEN

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION No.22O2 of2025 ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog paul) Ms.Rashmi, learned counsel appearing for Sri p.Venkat Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. prava,lika, learned counsel representing Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, appearing for respondent Nos. I to 4; and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.5. 2. With the consent, hnally heard.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties agreed that certain grounds taken in the appeal memo have not been considered by the appellate authority and therefore the appellate order dated 12.01.2024 may be set aside and the matter may be remitted back before the appellate authority to rehear the petitioner and pass a fresh order. I t t t t l I I I I :: ; ', I I 1

In view ol the aforesaid, the impugned order of .:he appellate authority dated 2.O1.2024 is set aside. The petitione' sha-ll now appear before 1.LLt'appellate authority on2l.O4.2025 at 11:30 A.M. The appellate shal1 rehezr the petitioner e nd pass a fresh order in zx:r:ordance with law.

Accordingll , the writ petition 1S disposed of without expressing ar-ty o1:,inion on the merits of the case. No cosrts Miscellar e ous petitions pending, if any, shall sternd closed. .K.AMMAJI qEPLlw REGISTRAR //// zLr rthority '\j SECTION OFFICER To, I BSK LS

The Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax (Ap&als-l)' i3ST Bhavan' ' i.b. Ei;ii;;;R;; Brth"erbash, Hvderabad - 500 -004

The Additiona Commissioner of Central T-ax' Hyderabad CiS I ' d;;i;;d'ie'aie, csr'enuuun, t- e Stadium doad' Bashee'bagh' Hyderabad - 500 004

The Principa llommissioner of Central Tax' Hfderabad GI)I " d;;it;6.u=t", cSiiini'in, t- B Stadium iload' Basheerbagh' Hyderabad - 500 004

The Su perirr.e ndent, Anti Evasion, Hyderabad Ot' "ornnis:;ionerate' GST - Ar"i;";;i"i',i stJJiJ, ndaE, aiinbe'oash, Hvderabad - 500 004

The Secretal', Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance' North Blcck' New Delhi - 1 10 001

One CC to SRI MD SHABAZ, Advocate' [OPUC]

One CC to Sitll DOIMINIC FERNANDES' Senior Standing C:unsel for CBIC' loPUCl 8. one cc to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR,. (Deputy solicikrr General of lndia)' " iisi, 6olirt ir.t. State of Telangana at Hyderabad [oPLlC;] Two CD Copies t{y

HIGH COURT DATED:0910412025 / /:li tJ 0 5 l'iAr 2025 r 2o a rr4- -.1 g-O ORDER WP.No.2202 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,l 4lef i I 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.