M/S. Sri Srinivasa Traders vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
Multiple petitioners, including M/s. Balaji Industries, M/s. Haritha Filling Station, M/s. MYK. Infra, M/s. Sri Sai Baba Enterprises, and M/s. Associated Transport, filed writ petitions before the High Court challenging show cause notices and summary orders issued by GST authorities. The petitioners contended that these notices and orders were unsigned, lacked a Document Identification Number (DIN), and were issued without providing an adequate opportunity to be heard. Specific tax periods mentioned include 2019-20, 2018-19, and others not explicitly detailed. The petitions also challenged notifications and government orders extending time limits for passing orders, arguing they were ultra vires to the CGST/SGST Act. The petitioners sought to declare these actions void, arbitrary, and illegal, and to set them aside.
Held
The High Court, by common order, set aside the impugned notices and orders in all the writ petitions. The Court's decision was based on the submission that the impugned notices and orders were unsigned. The Court explicitly stated that it was setting aside these documents in view of a common order previously passed in W.P.No.21101 of 2024 & batch dated 28.02.2025. Consequently, any consequential bank attachments were also revoked. The respondents were granted liberty to issue fresh show cause notices/orders in accordance with the law, and the limitation period was not to be a hurdle for them in undertaking this exercise. The Court explicitly stated that the writ petitions were disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs were awarded.
Key Issues
1. Whether unsigned show cause notices and summary orders issued under the CGST/TGST Act, 2017, are void, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction, violating Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether notifications and government orders extending the time limit for passing orders under Section 73(10) and Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, are without authority of law and ultra vires, violating Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 265 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued that the impugned notices and orders were unsigned and lacked a DIN, rendering them invalid. They also contended that the extended time limits for passing orders, as per certain notifications and government orders, were beyond the statutory provisions and violated constitutional rights. They relied on a common order passed in W.P.No.21101 of 2024 & batch dated 28.02.2025, which dealt with similar issues of unsigned notices and orders. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the respondents (State and Union of India).
Sections Cited
Section 73(10), Section 168A, Rule 142(1A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
impugnerl summary order 1st Respondent uncer the provisions of GGST/TGS::4 ^'o'o both issued by the T Act, 2017 as being void,
arbitrary, illegal, without juri iction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 1g(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and to consequenfly set aside any action taken pursuant thereto and pass such further or other order(s) as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the crrcumstances of the case (ii) declaring that the Notification No. 09/2023-C.T 118 dated 25.08.2023 issued dated 31.03.2023 issued by ResPondent No. 3 and correspon ding GO Ms. No. CT dated 28.12.2023 issued by Respondent No. 2 and Notifica No. 56/2023_ bY Respondent No. 3 and corres ponding GO. Ms. 170 dated 30..,2.2023 issued by Respondent No. 2, which extended the time limit for passing the orders, is without authority of law and ultra vires to the section 73(10) ofthe GSTAct 2017 and Section 1684 of CGST Act, 2017 and violative of artictes 1a, rc()@),21 and 265 of the Constitution of India. t.A. NO:10F 2025 ron petition Under Sec the arr dav t i eo n suppotlolrf : f ; jj: il:'r:[l. :jfi ffi [il:::;::::j; ::"r::;;;;;rrJr;i"f."d summary oroer in DRc-07 vide ,."r no perod2o18_1s,,0","o.'#:.1',^'J:X:::i::l;l,Jl"i:);Ji;[";1; Petition' as otherwise, the petitioner wi, be put to severe ross and hardship. Counsel for the petitioner : SRl. V.VEERESHAM FSHtTit;J+;Tespondent Nos.1 & 2 : sRr swARoop ooRrLLA, spl. G.p Counset for the Respondent No.3 : SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES Counset for the Respondent N.o.4 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLIC]TOR GENERAL OF INDIA W.P.NO: 5023 0F 2025 Between: M/s. MYK.lnfra, Represented by its proprietrix. Mrs. f""l;,lg[tllld[,;j',t+:[Xff f..Sii[rH:.;,'^f,Ti?l^t,Sg;.f,X"ffi ,ii .....PETITIONER
AND I-l,Hilfi Iff, ifl ffi E;Y313''^'llB"xlil.;3[Bia?i!:i'If, 3il"' igt**L-",.i**fr J,:',:if ::):'il;["*?:s:i:fl l3"o1:***'"tRevenue Union Bank, Represented oy it. Munrg"r, L.B. Nagar Branch' Hyderabad- 1. z. J 500068. 4 Union of lndia' New Delhi''1 10 r R:;,ti psAs"ll,',:gi:?"Jraxes and customs' Ministry of Finance' Represented by its Secretary' North Block' 0ill GST PolicY Wing' New Delhi .....RESPONDENTS Petition [Jnder Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in tfte atfiO'vit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue I wr t' order' or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamrrs (i.r decraring un signed show cause notice in Form DRC 01 vide Ref no. 2D361 '2101707;3 daled 13t1112021 and an unsir;ned impugned S u mm a ry o rd e r i n rr nc 07- vid e .'"t,il ,^1oLu^0,.1j::l:?::.lil:: ? ;:':;: both issued by tl'e 1st Respondent under the provtst' as being void, z rbitrary' illegal' without juri iction and without authority of law apart from beinr) vic'lative of Rule 142(1A) of the CGST/ TGSI Act' 2O17 and Articles 14, 19(1)(g l and 265 of the Constitution of lndia' and to c;onsequently set aside any actior taken pursuant thereto and pass such further or rlther order(s) as this Hon'ble Corlrt rrtay deem fit and proper in the circumstances; of the case' (ii) declare the Nr)tification No' 79 of 2020 dated 15 10 2020 issued by the Respondent No 5 amending the Rule 142 (1A) of the Cerrtral Goods and Services Tax R.rles 2017 and corresponding G'Q'Ms No 24' Rev (CT-ll) Dept" dr.og-o2.2o2j ssuerd by Respondent No. 2 amending Rule la2(lA) of rGST Rutes, 2017 as being without authority of law and ultra vires to Ihe Section 73 of the central Gcods and services Tax Act, 2017 and violativer of Articles 14, t 9(t Xg) and 21 ol the Constitution of lndia as being without authority of law and ultra vires to the , Ser:tion 73 of the Central Goods and Services Trax Act, 2017 and violative of Articles ' a, 19(1)(9) and 21 of the constitution of lndia and pass such other order or order:; as this court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances
of the case (iii) declare the Fo FY 2018-19 is without authority 265 of the Constitution of lndia rm DRC 13 dated 8.02.2( of law and viorative o, ,n,."t issued in respect to aid consequentrv ."t r.io" t"t""14 19(1xg)' 21 and t.A.NO: 10F 2025 Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court ma of operation of impugned Summary Order in y be pleased to stay 2D360424077271G dated 29.04.2024 issued by the Res DRC-OZ vide ref. no pondent No. 1 for the tax period 2018-19 under CGST/TGST Acts, 2017 pending drsposal of the above W Petition, as otherwise, the t n t.A W.P. :2O 202 petition Under Se, the arr dav t r "d n .,e;::o:rH:-'{ff ilTJIj :ifi ;:;ffi::::;:::i; operation of Form DRc 13 dated 13.02.202S issu"eo in respect to Fy, 20.18_.t9 by the Respondent No.1 to Respondent tto. S anO cor to operate their bank account. tsequently allow the petitioner Counset for the petitioner: SRt V.VEERESHAM FSil#it# rrilespondent Nos.l & 2: sRtSWARoop ooRtLLA, spl. c.p Counset for the Respondent No.3 : _ Counset for the Resoon,r?L1l9.4 : SRt GAD! PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUW SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Gounser for the Respondent No.S : sRr DoMrNrc FERNANDES Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship,,. .....PETITIONER .No F 5 NO: 3807 oF 2025 Mis. Sri Sai baba Entemrises, H.Np.^23_79125/.t, p.No.71, RK Nasar, Medchal _ }tftllajsiri, Hyderabad, tetansan-500047, -i6.'by it. p,"biilili' ni.',nl'irft]iljr, Between: AND 1 The Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rurat Division, Hyderabad.
, The Assistant Conrmissioner (ST)' Malkaigiri - lll Circle' Malkaigiri Division' ' Hyderabad' '$fl'Jil{5?l1l'f"fu[38-H+','"1!:'ffi""""?:?:?git"',:""?:3i3-) , The Union of f noi'' n"p' Uy it' S""'"tury' Ministry of Finance' N:rth Block' 'iilti**i*iuS*$"-"i:?'-'"1'"'i':':RiHiLi3"*"i'J"tli[T;''3i"iut' New Delhi - luLr uu ....RESPONDENTS Petition [lnder Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in tn" lO'O*n filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue Wril of Mandamus or any other appropriate !\'rit or Order or Direction declarirg tt'" uttion of the 1st Respondent in relecting the appeal order dated 18/09/2OZ,l ttr. .rm" uploaded in the Gsr portal without either physically nor digitaily sign,:d ,ruhich is contrary in Rule 26 (3) of the GGST R ules 2017 ' lhe appeal filed by ttre Pr:titioner under Section 107 of the Act' as the 1 st Respondent has no power to corr'lone the delay beyond four months' and the Summary of the Order in FORM GST DRC -07 of the 2nd Respondent' dated 31 112t2023 passed for the tax pericd Jr-ly' 2O17 loMarch' 2018 uploaded in the GSiT portal without either physicatly nor digitally signed which is contrary in Rule 26 (3) of the CGST Rules 2017, as legally unenforceable and non-est in the eye of law and set-aside the same, and zrs irrr:gar arbitrary ab initio void contrary to the pr.visions of GGST Act and Rules :1017 under the Central Goods and Service Tax r\ct 2017 and the State Goods ar d Stlrvice Tax Act 2017 ' as arbitrary' contrary to the provisions of the CGST / SCST Act 2017' and without even issuing Form GST DRC -01A as contemplated Ltnder Rule 142 (1A) of Rules 2017' without jtrri iction and in violation of Pri'rciples of Natural Justice and consequently set aside the Appeal Rejection Proc redirrgs of the 1st Respondent' dated 18/09/202'{ uploaded in the GST Portal ancl Surnmary of the Order' daled 31t12t2023 of the 2nd Respondent' I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 petition,nder section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fire d in support of the petition, the High court mery be preased to suspend the op'-'rati'rn of the Summary of the order, dated 31/1212023 passed by the 2nd Respo rderrt for the tax period Jury, 2017 to March, 2018 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the State Goods and Service Tax Act 2011 pending disposal of the above Writ petition, as otherwise, the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship t.A. NO:2 OF2025 W.P.No.4332 0F 2025 Between: petition under S( the aff davt f "d ..,p;;:i;:ffifl:,#Jll:iI;:;lJ:::::;T::i; of all further proceedings pursuant to the by re.iection order passed by the i st Respondent and the 2nd Respondent issueO tfr under section 78 of SGST Act 2017, r,." ;:"ri:;?;Lffi:r#::. 17/1212024 for the tax period Jury, 2017 to March, 2018under the central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the State Goods pending disposat or the above writ petition, ". ",;fl:"":T:.:.,1il"::#l: put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR FSHffXi? rffespondent Nos.1 to 3 : sRr swARoop ooRlLLA, spL. c.p SsliE"JJHSt""tHilt;ili$,1. : sRr GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEpury Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES i{j.t'l_l#fl##*}fu r,sxll?xsa5ffi :{:jfl HL,:::B[:irJF:i?s,Bxr?: AND .....PETITIONER ' ff3::l;:Tmissioner (sr), srUl secunderabad Division, Ameerpet, ' fffiffi:8ner of state Tax, Telangana, commerciat rax Buitding, Nampaly, 'S:i:,,'ll;f +'"?ifr S::"'J"[1#H"Jtx!',?T:,iu{Revenue)cr, .....RESPONDENTS
Petition Undt:r Article 226 of lheConstitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances statad ir tne atfiOavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a rVnt orOer or Direction more particularly' one' in the nature of Writ of Mandamus setting aside and quashing the unsigned Show Cause notice issued u/s 73 date I lS lt ZOZI and the unsigned attachment in Fc'rm No' DRC- 0'1 issued to the P:tition"' fo' tne tax period 2O1B-1S as void and ron-est in law' ll. set aside the a ssessment (audit) order dated 30.04.2024 levying tax' penalty and interest as inv alid 'and without legal effect' Petition Un ler Siection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased not to take any further steps consequent to passing of the assessmerrt (audit) order dated 30.04.2024 levf ing tax' penalty' interest' Counsel for the l'etitioner: SRI P'SOMA SHEKAR REDDY Counsel for the rlespondents : SRt SWAROOP OORILLA' SPL' G'P FOR STATE l.A.NO:1 OF 2025 TAX W.P.No: 6913 0 F-2025 Between: M/s. Sri Srin Pothireddi Mr.Vengalda AND ivasa Traders, D.No 9€3/4/A' Ground F-loor' PNR'Colonv NH No 65' Darr', Sianoareddv, , "',16'#,"" sodz'di' ' n"p ov it'd Proprietor' Li,,i ,hlr,i, piaohu, aged about 49 vears' .....PETtTtONER 1 . The State Tax Officer, Medak' Nizamabad' Telangana'
The Assis tant Commissioner (ST)' Medak' Nizamabad Division' Telangana
The State of Telangana, Rep by.its Principal Secretary' Revr>nue (CT) Departm€ nt. Telangana Secretariat, Hyoeraoao' ,....RESPONDENTS petition L nde, Articre 226 0f the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances s tate'J in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issuer writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate v/rit or order or Direction declaring.(i) the action of the 1 and 2 Re dated 30.12.2023, the summary of the ordersspondent in passing the orders, 30.12 2023 and proceedinss dated 30.12.2023,Hil ::l#Jrffj:: Section 73 of the SGST/CGST Acts, 2017, for th even iss u in g Fo rm GST DRc-, 1 A a s co ntem prat""r til.l""rr'::,:i'i; ] r;,-:l'li Rules 2017, without signature of the officer co 29.09.2023 and orders dated 30.12.2023 and rncerned in the Notice dated 30.12.2023 by the 1 *"."..n"*-.";;^i'l: -ummary of the orders dated the 2 nd Respo ndent, -*'ffi ';il il: ;j::::: :: fi:: :Hffi ;H: :J heard to the Petitioner, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the cGST/sGsr Acts 2017, and contrary to the Article 14 19 (2) tnir, ,i. ,UU;;;ilil ", lndia and consequenfly set_aside the Orders of the .l Respondent dated 30 12'2023 and Proceedings dated 30.12.2023for the same tax period i.e. 2o1T- 1B by passing murtipre rank officers is not varid in the eye of law, (ii) the action of the 2nd Respondent in uproading areged show cause notices and orders in the window Addr' Notices and orders instead of uproading in the window Notices and Orders. Hence, the orders law. Therefore, the notices the 1 and 2nd Respondents is not valid in the eye of null and void. and orders passed by the 1 and 2nd Respondents are I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 15't 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 operation of the order, dated 30.12.2023, Summary of the orders in Form GST DRC-07, dated 30.12.2023 passed by the 1"t Respondent and Proceedings dated 30.12.2023 passed by the 2nd Respondent, for the tax period 2017-18 under the .GST/'GST Acts 2017, pending disposar of the above writ petition' as otherwise' the petitioner wi, be put to severe ross and hardship. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI SHAIK JEELANT BASHA iiln""tfor the Respondents : SRt SWAROOP OORILLA, SpL. c.p FOR STATE
w.P.NO: 6930 oF2 null and void !.A.NO:1 OF 2025 w Between: Itit/s. Associated TrzLnsPt Hvderabad, Telang;tna - a5out 39 Years' '136'aJ;u;1tKl3,'l,XT33iltuE:#IR:HE:'fi i3:1"11 .,...PETITIONER AND 1. The Assistarrt Ccmmissioner (ST)' Begumpet-2' Begumpet' Hyderabad' 'ffi :lilHl+:[ll3:l?S"?;PJ'':?'"' jt?F$"':%"':?y6'i".]:ll j:li') .....RESPONDENTS Petition Ljnder Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances st lted in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue Wrir' of Mandamus or any other appropriate ' Writ or Order or Direction declarir g ( 1) the action of the 1st Respondent in pasr;ing the Order' dated 30.04.202 1, the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07' dated 30.O4.2[24and proceedings dated 25.04.2024 passed by the 1st Respondent' levying CGST/SOST under Section 73(10) of the CGST/SGST Ar;t' 2017' for the tax period 2018-19, 'Nithout even issuing Form GST DRC-O1A as contemplated under Rule 142(l A)of the Rules 2017' without signature of the olTicer concerned in the Show CaJSe Notice and Orders dated 30 04'2024 and fiummary of the Order dated 30)4 ''n24 passed by the 1st Respondent' and without generating DIN in the Notic':s atrd Orders is not valid in the eye of law and rot even granted an opportunity rf being heard to the Petitioner' as arbitrary' contrary to the provisions of the CGST/SGST Acts 2017' and contrary to the Article 14 19 (2) (g) 21 and 265 of Oonstitution of lndia and consequently set-aside the Order dated 3O.O4.2L24,the sunmary of the Order dated 30'04'2024 and Pr'lceedings dated 25.04.2024 pas;ed r:y the 1st Respondent for the tax period 2018-19' as illegal' Petition urder Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file(r in support of the petition, the High Court may, be pleased to suspend the operation r ;nj ffi ",x,,J:,:* :::#*'t;:ffi r ::,:; cGST/sGsr Acts 2017, "ro ,,""-l'1"^_,j, .1", ,|l" tax period 2018_1s under the ffi:::ffi :ij'; ffi ;1,: tff :1,:: :ffi ::H".* i:: i,;:: Counsel for the petitioner: SRt SHAIK JEELANI BASHA f;nset for the Respondents : sRt swARoop ooRtLLA, spl. The Court made the following COMMON ORDER G.P FOR STATE
THE H(IN'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HoN'BLE sMT' JusucB RENUKA YARA T PETITON Nos. 244t 3979 5o23 3807 433l2 6913 & WRI 6930 of.2 o25 coMMON 9 -RDER (Per the Hon 'ble the Acting Cht;f 'Iustice S-tt iog Paul)" Sri .,/.Veeresham, learned counsel for the pt':titioner(s) in W.P.Nos 24'1 l, 3g7g & 5023 of 2025'' Sri Venktrtram Reddy Mantur, lealned counsei for the petitioner(s) jn W P'No'3807 of I). Soma Shekar Reddy, Iearned counsel for the 2025; Srr petitiolrt r(s1 1n W.P.No.4332 of 2025 and Sri Sihaik Jeelant Basha,ea:.lredcounselforthepetitioner(s)in\\r,]r.Nos.6913& 6g30crf2Ol25arrdSriSwaroopoorilla,learnedSpeciai Goverlrr :rt: rtl. Pleader for State Tax, for the respo'edent(s)-State Tax.
Reg ard being had to the similitude of r-he questions involvec, or: the joint request of learned counsel f':rr tlre parties, the matteri were ara-logously heard and decided b1 this common order. 3 Le;u-ned counsel for the petitioners and le,arned Special \-> Govertrrter 1 pleader for State Tax submitted that since the 2 lmpugned notice(s) arrd order(s) are unsigned, the same may be set aside in view of the common order passed in W.p.No.21lOl of 2024 & batch, dated 28.O2.2025. Accordingly, the impugned notice(s) and order(s) in these Writ Petitions are set aside. The 4 consequential bank attachment(s), if any, shall a_lso stand revoked. Liberty 1S reserved to the respondents to issue fresh show cause notice(s) / order(s) rn accordance with law and, for undertaking this exercise afresh, the limitation will not be a hurdle for the respondents. 5 The Writ Petitions are disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. /ffRUE COPY// .MOHD.ISMAIL AS IS ANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER to ,l. ,n" Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department' Telangana Secretariat' Hyderabad, State of Telangana at Hyderabao'
The Assistant comniJtt-nti 5r' 4"6'* Bazar' Charminar Division' Sth - Fioor, Gaganvihar Building, Nampally' Hyderabad-SO0 001'
The Commissioner, cJni'Zr 'do"ii oi inoi'""t Taxes and Customs' GST Policv wing, New Delhi- . ,, North Block, New Delhi- +. Tfietecretary, Union of lndia' Ministry of Finance 5 110001 Ttiissistant commissioner sr, vanasthalipuram-1 Circle, saroomagar ;iiliillt;,t-h;int, itn n*', caganvihar iomplex' opp' Gandhi Bhavan' .\Hit$ti:!i;:iii:Ii'\T:$::i:Hs:":epa'.men'i(a'mmercra\
/ i,ii,li=iil3Jfi':,H}'d11ffi:?f ,I:r#Hi::"*i**,,* i o. Tne DePut'l Commlsstor HvderabaC ' '' I[:"lui'ilgi?:^*:1*[:i,:[,::?ffi1il-,,-X:'" 12.The A1'Pellate Joint con Hyderirbad - ;ioner (sr), Malkalgiri - lll circle' M€rlkaigiri Division' 1 3.The A';sistant Commtss ,r. ?ill"J il39r;rl secretary, Revenue (cr) Department' Dr' B r ' Ambedkar' Telan'lana Secretariat' 'Si't" of f"i'ngqT 'lll1","btd ',u.16" 6 6airrnan, Central it'O "t lndirJct Taxes and Custo'ns' Ministry of Finan;e, 'lepartment "ft#il' *"il elock' Central se:retariat' New Delhi - 100 c01. 16.One oC tc SRI SHAIK JEELANI BASHA' Adv-olale tOPUq 17.one oc lc sRl swAR6SFb'oniLLn' spl e p FoR srr\TE TAX' Advocate SA LS TOPUCI ra.5n" ,ri tc' SRI V.VEERESHAM, Advocate (OPUC) ir.o;; tc to SRI P.SoMA sHEKAR REDDY' Advocate (oF'uc) ,0.o;; ]c ic, sRl DoMlNlC FERNANDES' Advocate (OPUC) * -. 21.One lC k) SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR' DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF lttDlA, Advocate (OPUC) ZZ.OI" jC t,, Snf VENKATRAI\4 REDDY IVIANTUR, Advoca:e (OPUC) 23.Two lD C:opies Yr
ffi I I \ HIGH COURT DATED:21 10312025 COMMON ORDER W.P.Nos.2'.441, 397 g, 5023, 3807, 433:,'-,6913 AND 6930 0F 2025 WITHOU-I'COSTS. t e E. SIAr a l;titi { /" l ) 19 trfir ?ii5 ',,;. + '..',-. ra...r-, ' -::.')./ --\,__7- DISPOSII.IG OF THE WRIT PETITIONS .4" XK, 25
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.