Dilip Super Market vs. Superintendent Of Central Tax - Telangana High Court, 03 April 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

H|GH couRr .?+ I+ED8ItlisF TE:ANGANA tspeciii cjiiginal J urisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL 'i.iiil-iousAND AND rwENrY FlvE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKAYARA t 34461 2025 Anil Kumar Agarwal 29l3rt' gana - 500057' .....PETITIONER .....RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION NO: 9860 OF Between: AND SJX|. ": lts:l Vffi "[,"rum [':L,'J" Leil i g; 1. 2. 3. 4. 3ilfl.?'rf Ef,"# "J ft*SiJtblSy]':n"** Ra n s e' Abid s G sr D ivi sio n' Aki ra Assistant Commissioner' Central Tax' Review Section' Hyderabad GST Commissionerate' 5"..:liyEll::,"-3,:l!,["g,::fi ll:i'3LR:3::1ff 3:?"';ia'-';140'wardNo6' yffi lssg'e[*,."""','JiH:*lffi :,li;ff 'sL*#,'l':f;'"[?J:i"^[;Hi'iy" 110001 PetitionUnderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ' order or direction particularly one in the 1r"t::" t].-'-*t" of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring Order in Original bearing No' O5i2O24-25-GST dated 22'04'2024 issued along with Form DRC-07 dated 26.O4.2[24vide Reference No' 2D360424059698U by Respondent No 1 under Section 74 of the CGST Act and consequent bank attachment dated 21 'O3 '2025 issued under Section 79 of the CGST Act by Respondent No'3 as being a nullity and non-est in aw on account of not having any signature in DRC-07 dated 26'04'2024 anci llso being contrary to Rure ia2 of ccsr Rures, 2017 and iregar in accordance wi h th d\sqheme of the GST Acts. l.A.NO:1 OF 202a t.A.NO:20F2025 petition Un Jer riection 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may. be preased to suspend the banl attach th e d is p uted a mc u nts J""J' ;T:, ;:?:1;; r::*.::T:, 1,, l"J ;::f H: pending disposal rf the Writ petition as otherwise severe loss and ha rdsl-rip. ' ! r( I slrLr(-'r I as olnerwlse the Petitione" will be put to petition Undr;r st;ction 151 cpc praying that in the circumstancbs stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay the order in originar be;aring No. o5/2024-2S-esr aatea 22.o4.2o2ttissued arong with Form DRC-07 dated 26.04.2024 vide Reference No. 2D360424059698U by Respondent No l l nde' section 74 0f the .GST Act and any coercive steps against the petitione r bV the Respondents. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI PRAVEEN K. NAIR 3;Xffi:lrStB"rfi8.;.fi8ilLIos.1 & 2 : sRr DoMrNrc FERNANDES (sENroR Counsel forthe Respondent No.3 : - ssll;,ilJH 8E^E"J| t ; l^i $,1. : s Rr GAD I PRAVE E N KUMAR, D E puw

The Court made the folloriving ORDER

TITE HON'BLETHE AC-TTNG CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HON',BLE SMT' JUJi-flcE RENUKAYARA ORI)ER: WRIT PETITIoN No'986o 9f 2o?5 ., (Per tlle rtiiat tnti"ting Chief Justice Sujog Paul) AND aJ 4 Sri Praveen K Nair, iearned counsel lor the Petitioner and CounseI for CBIC, for Sri Dominic Fernandes' Iearned Standing respondent Nos' 1 and 2'

Heard on admission This writ petition assaiis the Order-in-Original daLed 22'04 '2024' The present writ petition is filed on 28 'O3 '2025 5. karned counsel for the petitioner submits that Form GST DRC-07 dated 26'04'2024 is an unsigned document'

On a specihc query from the Bench regarding the delay in assailing the order daled 22'O4 '2024 ' learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention only to paragraph No.7 of the writ affrdavit' Thelearnedcounselforthepetitionerhasnotexplainedthedelayin assailing the order dated 22'04 2024 after considerable long time The petitioner had a remedy of appeal against the Order-in-Original dated \ 22.04.2024withinaperiodofninetydays.TheApexCogrtln

\-!\l 2 Assistant Commission consumer Hearth "."::::,."::',:.:1.r" v. Graxo smith Krine under:- "' paragraph No.l9 opined as "I9. Vt e nu W{#{ffiWtrin. 4811 . Tire Io ,',,* *':':#::":1i':'i:-*t'**i$t*t t,: if *:i u::*ilI ;J#: i:, ff i. "Jffi ?i,",".r.....*, n oi ( u, a,,,he ;#{":::,r;'I"ri"uli"'""iil.'".l*,r; ,, ;" ,.,'I".Ti.,i f ,:i ll; o r " pp " u r 1 ;; ; :: i ::ffi :,1;^i1",_$' 3l,ii;:l;.:", ; ;j;;;', :., ::tl5 iil"l',",,:i:.:i;"*::_{iiff ',i53;;ix;;1ru":';:'i:;r::s LTrts of jr trisc r u r e s o r,, .",, ;:"f: t"f i!ff ; .d;:i:",TJx ,",? i: :'.x:, 1^,TJ Il :'" ".i I .."1 r r..-',""'- I1,,?.,1 : " :r, * j,t,1;'* iii ] lll-# :::h : "tr, u",,,iJ'*a" :ff"':,,"q ,,r" ,r,*,r'i"# T::.'1 ir srice. i{irH 1;',1; ;pi.I.:F" flt :fi #, ;; *,, "' :I J' :: I : ; : ,#ilf *f"*Fi{fi,#tr[ffi ffiil'#,Ut*t+*:*ffi ;;-*.t*:#*li:lt*l*::i",",::r*i":ffi ttr r.,rnbedunder"..iiJ,lTr"...1i"t;t-.""":l:""__";;l;.,11; ' (rrro) ,q saa u;-.-.-..-_-- -_-- '-- ''r'vo act' That wouli II L

3 t render the legislative scheme and intention behind the stated provision otiose." (Emphasis suPPliedl 7 . In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court, the petitioner could have hled the writ petilion within the statutory period of limitation for hling the petition. The petition is filed with sufficient amount of delay and without there being any explanation for delay' For this reason alone, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter' B. The admission is declined and the writ petition is dismissed No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed' .K.AMMAJI DEPUTY REGISTRAR //// SECTION OFFICER To 1. one CC to SRI tlty.SFN K'NAIR' Advocate 'otY""J,nn counsel for i. il ;a i; aRi DoMlNlc FERNANDES (senior sta CBIC) Advocate [OPUCI 5"LtCi" snt e'Rot PRnvrEN KUMAR' OF lNDIA, Advocate (OPUC) Two CD CoPies DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL 3 4 SA LS

HIGH COUIIT DATED:03ltl4l?021 ORDER WP.No.9860 of 2OZs DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. 1'/3 ,7"<'/Zg y, E STa )'€ )e I( -'t 1i AiH 2075 e \' aQ l tt .\a-_-_-_-;;2 I I