M/S. Dwarka Fasteners vs. The Assistant Commissioner St

WP/3537/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01006264202512 March 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Dwarka Fasteners, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice dated 13.11.2021 and an order in DRC-07 dated 28.04.2024, both issued by the Assistant Commissioner ST, Fathenagar Circle. The petitioner also challenged an order in appeal dated 25.09.2024 issued by the Appellate Joint Commissioner. The petitioner sought to declare these orders void, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction, and also challenged the blocking of their electronic credit ledger for ₹29,29,213/- by the first respondent on 16.01.2025. The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Held

The Court set aside the impugned show cause notice and orders. The reasoning was based on the common order passed in a batch of writ petitions, W.P.No.21101 of 2024, which held that unsigned notices and orders are liable to be set aside. The Court reserved liberty for the respondents to issue fresh show cause notices/orders in accordance with law, and importantly, stated that the limitation period would not be a hurdle for the respondents in undertaking this exercise afresh. Furthermore, since the petitioner's electronic credit ledger was blocked based on the impugned orders, the Court directed that it be provisionally lifted, subject to the liberty granted to the respondents. The Court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notice, DRC-07 order, and appellate order are void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India, as argued by the petitioner. 2. Whether the action of blocking the petitioner's electronic credit ledger is void and illegal, as argued by the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the impugned notice and orders were unsigned, rendering them invalid. The revenue or State did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

Sections Cited

CGST/TGST Act, 2017

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

134461 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION NO: 3537 OF 2025 Between: AND M/s. Dwarka Fasteners, A-7, C I E, Balanagar, Rangareddy, Telangana, 500037 Represented by its Proprietor, Dilip Dwarkadas Jaju, aged about 58 years, S/o. Dwarkadas Jaju, Rlio. 7-1-2461118116, Renukanagar, Balkampet, Hyderabad- 500016 ...PETITIONER 1 . The Assistant Commissioner ST, Fathenagar Circle, Hyderabad Rural Division, 2nd Floor, South Wing, Gaganvihar Building, Opp. Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad-500 001 2. The Appellate Joint Commissioner, Hyderabad Rural Division, Sth Floor, C'T Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad- 500 004 3. State of Telangana, Through Principal Secretary to Govemment Revenue Department (Commercial Tax), Hyderabad, Telangana ...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 (1)declaring Show cause notice in Form DRC 01 vide Ref no' 2D361121015844Q dated 13.11.2021 and Order in DRC-07 vide ref. no. 2O360424O71798W dated 28.04.2024 both issued by the 'l st Respondent and an Order in Appeal in Form GST APL 04 vide ref. no.2D360924022571F dated 25.O9.2024 issued by 2nd Respondent under the provisions of CGST/TGST Act, 2O17 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and to consequently set aside any action taken pursuant thereto and pass such further or other orde(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (ii)declaring the action of Respondent no. 1 blocking the electronic credit ledger for an amount ot 29,29,2131- of the Petitioner through Reference No. BL3601250000180 dated 16.0'1 .2025 as being void, i I 7 THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. WSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION No.3537 of 2O2S ORDER: (Per tLrc Hon'ble the Acting ChieJ Justice Sujog Paul) Sri V.Veeresham, learned counsel for the petttioner and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State \ Tax, for the respondents 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Government l)leader for State Tax submitted that since the impugned notice ald orders are unsigned, the same :nay be set aside in view of the common order passed in W.P.No.2110i of 2024 &, batch, dated 28.O2.2O25. 3. Accordinigly, the impugned notice and o rders are set aside. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to rssue fresh show cause notice/order in accordalce with law and, for undertaking this exerclse afresh, the limitation will not be a hurdle for the respondents. In addition, since the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger is unilaterally blocked based on the \ nII 2. t-- To, BN LS impugned orders, the same be provisionally lifted subject to the liberty given. 4. The Writ Petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, sha-ll also stand closed. SD/-V.KAVITHA AS ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION. OFFICER (n- 1. The Assistant Commissioner ST, Fathenagar Circle, Hyljerabad Rural ' Oi"iJiJn 2"altotr, Soutn Wing, Gaganvihar Building, opp' Gandhi Bhavan' Nampally, HYderabad-500 001 z f['" Aoo'effaie Joint Com.iiiionet, Hyderabad Rural Division, 5th Floor, C.T. Compidx, Nampally, Hyderabad- 500 004 a. i6e Fiiniipaf Sbir6tary to Government Revenue Department (Commercial Tax). Statd of Telanqaha, Hvderabad, Telangana 4. on€i cc to sRl V. VEERESHAM, Advocate [OPUC] d: i;; cc"iJsnr swARo-oi ooirllrn, sp[ GP foi state Tax, Hish court for . the State of Telangana. [OUTI 6. Two CD CoPies HIGH COURT DATED:1210312025

WP.No.3537 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS fu e' c 0 2 ,ii 2u5 zc .l 1 u-t I A/' o() s

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.