U-Foam PVT. LTD vs. The State Of Telangana

WP/8476/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01016630202526 March 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI KAILASH NATH p.S.SFor Respondent: 1 & 3 to 5: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP for State Tax

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, U-Foam Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court seeking a direction to the respondents to consider their representation dated 18.10.2024 and issue FORM GST DRC-25. The petitioner contended that the inaction of the respondents in not considering their representation and not issuing the specified form was illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and violative of Circular No. 187/19/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022. The respondents included the State of Telangana, Union of India, the Commissioner of Hyderabad GST, the Assistant Commissioner, and the Superintendent (CGST). The petition also included an interlocutory application seeking a direction to consider the representation.

Held

The Court noted that during the course of the hearing, the learned counsel for the parties reached a consensus. It was agreed that the writ petition could be disposed of by directing respondent No. 4 (Assistant Commissioner) to decide the petitioner's pending representation dated 18.10.2024 within thirty days. Consequently, the petitioner was directed to resubmit the representation along with a copy of the order to respondent No. 4. Respondent No. 4 was then mandated to consider and decide the representation within thirty days by passing a reasoned order in accordance with the law. The Court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs were awarded.

Key Issues

1. Whether the inaction of the respondents in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2024 and not issuing FORM GST DRC-25 is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and violative of Circular No. 187/19/2022-GST, thus warranting a writ of Mandamus? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that the respondents' failure to act on their representation and issue FORM GST DRC-25 was in contravention of the law and the relevant circular, causing prejudice. They sought a direction for the issuance of the form. Respondents' argument: The respondents, represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax and the Deputy Solicitor General of India, did not present any specific arguments against the petitioner's claim. Instead, during the hearing, the parties reached a consensus.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 3446 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENry SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTTNG CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETI NNO:8476 OF 2025 Between: U-Foam Pvt. Ltd, 8-2-408, Road No.6, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500034 Rep. by its Director, Jagannath Sarangapani ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, Revenue (CT) Dept., Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad. Rep., by its Principal Secretary 2. Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, 15' Safdarjung - noat, New Ddlhi - 116001 Representdd by its Secretary, New Delhi 3. The Commissioner, Hyderabad - ll Commissionerate, GST Bhawan, LB Stadium Road, HYderabad 4. The Assistant Commissioner, Banjara Hills -2 Division, Amiso Plaza, Road no.12, Banjara Hills, HYderabad. 5. The Superintendent (CGST), Banjara Hills Range -2, 3rd Floor, Amiso Plaza, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad ...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 the inaction of the Respondents in not considering the representation of the PLtitioner dated 1gl1ot2O24 and in further not issuing FORM GST DRC-25 in respect of GSTIN 36IvtuACU2783K1Z0 and as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of circular No. 18711912022-GST dt.2711212022 and conseqlentty direct the Respondents to issue FORM 'GST DRC-25 to the Petitioner in accordance with law. lA NO: 1 QF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumsiances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider die representation dated 18.1C .2024. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KAILASH NATH p.S.S. Counsel for the Respondent No:1 & 3 to 5: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP for State Tax Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI B. MUKHERJEE REPRESENTING FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, T,Y. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

The Court made the iollowing: ORDER 7

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF TIUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION No.8476 of 2O2S ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paul) Sri Kailash Nath P.S.S, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, appearing for respondents Nos.l and 3 to 5; and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Piaveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.2. 2. With the consent, hnally heard.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties reached to a consensus. It is agreed that this writ petition may be disposed of by directing respondent No.4 to decide the petitioner's pending representation dated la.LO.2024 within thirty days.

In view of the consensus arrived at, the petitioner is directed to resubmit the representation dated 18.IO.2O24 along with a , I copy of this order before respondent No.4 who, in turn, shall 2 consider and decide it within thirty days by passinp; a reasoned order in accordzrnce with law.

With the aforesaid and without expressing an1 opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs \ Miscellane,ous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //rRUE coPYtt i,'T'iPit'":5iHH / 1t To, i i ',sEcIoNoFFtcER ; #f[{?d,"3;!rlidrllffitate orreransan'' R"')iun'" (cr) oepr, ' " , Jp, s^ardarjrln'g noril nl*t;t,#':ltlfln3frFinance, Departmen: or Revenue ; $i:'di?Ifl::':lli!#J#l'oao - rrioil-missionerate, Gsr Bhiirwan, LB : iii l:E!Xt:,tliillT,5;l"J:t,?l nja ra H irs -2 Divis io n, Am iso r:,raza, Road _iffi';,*$ffiv*ffidffiffi;

HIGH COURT DATED:2610312025 ORDER WP.No.8476 ol 2025 ..-.-.,'.i,..- ./.'.,1.'. t'tt. ./l\. . \ ' .1.. 2 2 nrn 2p5 ir.. i'.')., >;) t:.- ,, :, , i ,/ \ t)€ "l -.t" DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COS'TS (t- t( k {

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.