M/S. Bhagyalaxmi Cotton Industries vs. Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Bhagyalaxmi Cotton Industries, filed a Review I.A. No. 1 of 2025 seeking to review an order dated January 2, 2025, passed in Writ Petition No. 16038 of 2024. The original writ petition had questioned the validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act/SGST Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that the Appellate Authority lacked the power to decide on the constitutionality of a statutory provision. The State Tax Department raised a formal objection. The High Court considered the arguments presented by both sides.
Held
The Court found substance in the petitioner's argument that the Appellate Authority of the department would not be able to decide the constitutionality of a statutory provision. Consequently, the order passed in Writ Petition No. 16038 of 2024 on January 2, 2025, was recalled. The Writ Petition was restored to its original number. The review application was disposed of accordingly. The principle derived is that matters concerning the constitutionality of statutory provisions fall within the purview of the High Court and not departmental appellate authorities.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Appellate Authority under the GST regime has the power to decide on the constitutionality of a statutory provision, specifically Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act/SGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act/SGST Act, 2017, was challenged in the original writ petition. They argued that this specific relief, which involves questioning the constitutionality of a statutory provision, cannot be considered and decided by the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the writ petition should be restored to allow for this aspect to be argued and decided by the High Court. Revenue/State's Argument: The Special Government Pleader for State Tax raised a formal objection.
Sections Cited
Section 16(2)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
No 5, the Court made the following ORDER Sri Akruti Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Swaroop Oorilla, Learned Special Government Pleader for res pon de n t-State Tax. With the consent finally heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on para 'relief prayed for'in the Writ Petition and urge that the validity of Section 16(2Xc) of the CGST AcUSGST Act, 2017 was called in question. This relief praye{ for cannot be considered and decided by the Appell3te Authority. Thus, lhe Writ Petition may be restored, so that, the said aspect can bq argued and decided. Learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax has raised formal objection. We find substance in the argument of learned counsel for the p-etitioner that the Appellate Authority of the Department will not be able to decide the constitutio na lity of the statutory provision. Resultantly, the order passed in WP.No.16038 of 2O24, dated 02.01.2025 is recalled. The Writ Petition is restored to its original number. Accordingly, this Application stands disposed of. A copy of this order be kept in the writ petition. .N. SRIH ASSISTANT REGIS R ,// SECTION OFFICER To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Warangal Urban-l Circle, Warangal
ll
The Chief Secretary and Special Chief Secretary to Government (FAC), State Tax Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.
The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Jeevan Deep Building, 3id Floor, Sansad [/arg, New Delhi-l10 001. 4. The Commissioner (GS), Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing, Government of lndia, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.
I\4/s. Madhuri Cotton Iraders,ll-24-2611'1l3, Mani Venkataiah Colony, Deshaipet Road, Hanumakonda-506 002. GSTIN 3645NPT1475D1ZG.
The Registrar Judicial - l, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad 7 The Section Officer, Writ D.B. Section, High Court for the Slatg of Telangana at Hyderabad. Q One CC to Ms. AKRUTI AGARWAL, Advocate [OPUCI
One CC to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, Learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, Advocate IOPUCI 10 One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Learned peputy $olicitor General of lndia, Advocate (OPUC) 1 'l . One -CC to Ms, B.SAPNA REDDY, Learned Senior Standir-rg Counsel for CBIC, Advocate (OPUC) '!2.Twq CD Qopies l SA BS
HIGH COURT DATED:0710312025 ORDER REVIEW No.1 of 2025 IN WP.No.'|6038 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE I.A AND RESTORING THE W.P t\la .STA,1rU ,> 11 IIAfl zffi G) .i) * ',\''(l oEsPA:'t c \
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.