M/S.Taiyo Nippon Sanso INDIA Private Limited vs. The Additional Commissioner Appeals-Ii

WP/2976/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01003749202501 April 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-GST-MD-APP2-329/2024-25-GST dated 30/09/2024, passed by Respondent No. 1. The petitioner sought various reliefs including a declaration that the order was illegal, without reasons, and in violation of natural justice. The petition also sought a stay on the recovery of interest on amounts totaling Rs. 67,70,285, Rs. 40,18, Rs. 26,552, and Rs. 38,77,777, as well as penalties of Rs. 10,000 (SGST), Rs. 20,000 (CGST), and Rs. 20,000 (IGST) pursuant to the impugned order. The matter was listed before the High Court.

Held

The Court noted that the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to file afresh if the occasion arose. The learned counsel for the respondents had no objection to this request. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for by the petitioner. No order as to costs was made. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were also ordered to stand closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-GST-MD-APP2-329/2024-25-GST dated 30/09/2024 is illegal, without reasons, in violation of principles of natural justice, erroneous, passed without jurisdiction, arbitrary, and in violation of mandatory prescribed procedure under law? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the Order-in-Appeal was illegal, lacked reasons, violated principles of natural justice, was erroneous, passed without jurisdiction, arbitrary, and failed to follow the mandatory prescribed procedure. The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ to declare the order as such and to issue any other appropriate writ or order. The petitioner also sought a stay on the recovery of various interest amounts and penalties. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel representing Respondents No. 1 to 3 (which includes the revenue) had no objection to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

t 3446 I H'GH couRr'?T ITED:IIIi8: .:=:-*-^ tspecii ciriilinat Jurisdiction) H,'"'?iXJS'-5'1il'$"'R++Eilt PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTIN.G-CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HONOURAB,= .#X,,'.CE RENUKA YARA ""*""f;#,o1i*#sitr*5x5;5}fu f*:ffi l.",#,fl1i3i:?:T['fi",i,I"'''4":I AND 'H""i'3sfB1f":Ti'"'l$::fl'fa*l:#'1?3'11i3"'1ruffi3$?;67 'f ,m***tffi ?i"'*:"'E#Bf"%TJ:lb?'Til'll"d3:313?L"'o"sn' '***mm*fd3!Is:'.',8;t"'nilsra?sl$'fff t%TJ'lJffi LT -8',$:f*""',"&13[5tTii5?'"?!i39,,',],t?5lit"is$ff6?'ary'Revenue 5 union of lndia' Ministry of Finance' Represented by its Secretary' North Btock' = -'NewDelhi 110001 "'RESP.NDENT. PETITION NO'.29760F 2025 wRIT 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 Order-in-Appeal No' HYD-GST- MD-APP2-329/2024-25-GST dated 30/09/2024 passed by the Respondent No'1 as illegal, without any reasons' in violation of principles of natural justice' as :i rl rl erroneous, passecl witho prescribed under raw or to i jurisdiction' arbitrary' and manclatory

ssue any other appropriate Writ or ord er. procedure IA 025 NOl 1 oF2 Petition unde'section 151 cpc praying that in the circumr;tances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay recovery of (i) rnterest on Rs'67,70,285r, (ii) rnterlst on Rs.40,.18rf(iii) rnterest on Rs.26,S5Z-, (iv) lnterest ( csrR.3B rer,,rns,,, .:!lil"':; r:: ;:JJ: iil,:::IJ,: ru;;;l; (CGST), (vii) penatty of Rs.10,000 (SGST), (viii) penatty of Rs.20,000i-(tGST) and any other coercive steps pursuant to the impugned order-in-Appear No.HyD-GST- MD-A9F,2-329|2O24.25_cST dated 30.09.2024. Counsel for the petitioner: sff a"^liixlri,xF P R E s E N fl N G counser for the Respondent Nos'l to 3: sRr DoMrNrc FERNANDES (senior standing counsel for CBI,C Counsel for the Respondent No.4: cp FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.S: SR! cADl PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUry SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Couft made the foltowing: ORDER

(-\' THE HON'BLE TIIE ACTING.C.TIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAIJL- THI IION'BLE ST,TI.HSUCE RENUKA YARA - (Per the Hon'bte the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paut) No.2976of 20]232 counsel rePresentmg the Petitioner and ITION ORD Sri Karan resPondents No'1 to 3

Leamed counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ petition with the Uberty to the petitioner to frle afresh' if occasion so arises ' Talwar, learned counsel for Standing Counsel for CBIC, for Fernaldes, learned Senror 3 4 The other side has no objectron Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the libertY PraYed for' No order as to costs' Miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed' .L.LAKSH MI BABU D PUTY REGISTRAR ,TII ECTION OFFICER Sri G.Prahlad, learned Sri Domrnrc ng counsel for CBIC) the State of Telangana' at licitor General of lndia[OPtJC] To I 3t3 33 3 3,.i ffiilJ?'y#:#J?:3s"tPJ#*1 ; p;$e"t:ge":::J:: J:::il :: TJ LS W i I I I l I I

, HIGH COURT DATED:01 tO4tZOZs ORDER WP.No.2976 of 2O2S 11 t:Pfl 20fr i / )ri r, .- \} i-) lo I .,. .-t I .. DISMISSIGN THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDIIAWN WITHOUT COSTS 1f ro\' flr{ \

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.