M/S. Nichino Chemical INDIA Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA

WP/35196/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01068272202427 January 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Nichino Chemical India Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the Order-in-Original No. 126/2024-25-GST-ADJN-SGRDIV dated 26.08.2024 and a corrigendum dated 29.08.2024, issued by the 4th Respondent (Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax). These orders pertained to bunched years from 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22. The petitioner also challenged the consequential order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 14.09.2024 for the period April 2021-March 2022. The petitioner sought to declare these actions illegal, arbitrary, and violative of natural justice, and to quash them. An interim application was also filed to suspend the effect of the Form GST DRC-07 order.

Held

The Court did not decide the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the Writ Petition. The petitioner prayed for a direction that if an appeal is preferred before the appellate authority against the impugned order within three weeks, the same may be heard on merits. The counsel for the respondents had no objection to this request. Consequently, the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn. However, in the interest of justice, the Court directed that if an appeal is preferred before the appellate authority within twenty-one days from the date of the order, the said authority shall decide the appeal on merits and shall not dismiss it solely on the ground of delay. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the bunched-up Order-in-Original No. 126/2024-25-GST-ADJN-SGRDIV dated 26.08.2024, along with its corrigendum and the consequential order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 14.09.2024, issued by the 4th Respondent for the periods 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22, are illegal, non-est in law, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice, as contended by the petitioner. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were illegal, non-est in law, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner sought to quash these orders. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the revenue or state respondents regarding the merits of the petitioner's claims. The counsel for the respondents had no objection to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition.

Sections Cited

Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAEAD (Special Original J urisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA [ 3446 1 61, IDA, Harinath Between: M/s. Nichino Chemical lndia Private Limited, Plot No. 60 and Pashamylaram, Sangareddy, Telangana - 502307. Represented by D Reddy. Sio. Lote, Krishna Reddy Age. 42 years, Occ. Employee. .....PETITIONER AND '1 - Union of lndia, Rep by its Secretary, Ivlinistry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 1 10 001 . 2. Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, Rep by its Chairman, I\,4inistry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 1 10 001 . 3. The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise and Service Tax, Medchal GST Commissio nerate, Hyderabad. 4. The Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Sangareddy CGST Division, Medchal CGST Commissionerate, Plot No. 328, SSR Arcade, Matrusrr Nagar, Miyapur, Hyderabad- 500049. 5. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Circle-Vll, Audit - ll Commissionerate, Door No. 1-98/8/20,21 , Sanvi Yamuna Pride, Krithika Layout, Madhapur, Hitech City, Hyderabad-500081. .....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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the , a) action of 4thRespondent in issuing bunched up Order- ln-Original No.12612O24-25-GST-ADJN-SGRDIV DlN. 20240856YQ0O007O27 46 PRESENT WRIT PETITION NO: 35196 OF 2024 dated 26'0g 2024 arong with subsequent corrigendum to order-rn-original vide DrN' 20240856yQ0000823648 dated 29.0g.2024 for bunched up years from 2019-20' 2020-21 and 2021-22 and consequentiar effectuar orders in F.RM GST DRC-07 vide Ref No. 2D360924014gg7T dated 14.09.2 o24for rhe period Aprir 2021-March 2022issued by the 4th Respondent as being iltegal, non_est in law, arbitrary' viorative of principres of naturar justice and consequenry to quash the same. l.A.NO:1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 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 effectuar summary of order in FoRM GST DRC-07 vide Ref No. 2D360924014997T dated 14.O9.2024for the period Apr, 2021-March 2O22under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 issued by the 4thRespondent pending the disposal of the writ petition. Counset for the petitioner : SRt RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJI Counset for the Resoond?l-!1,,t9.1 : SRt GAD| PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEpUTy SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA f;[i6ill.Jlt"JSspondent Nos.2 to 5 : sRr DoMrNrc FERNANDES,

The Court made the following ORDER 7

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA II/RIT PETITION No.35196 of 2024 ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paul) Sri Salvaji Raja Shekar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, after a-rguing the matter for some time, seeks to withdraw this Writ Petition and prays for a direction that if an appeal is preferred by the petitioner before the appellate authority against the impugned order within three weeks, the same may be heard on merits

Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, for respondent Nos.2 to 5, has no objection.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, in the interest of justice, it is observed that if the appeal is preferred before the appellate authority against the impugned order within twenty one days from today, the said authority shall decide the appeal on merits and the same shall not be thrown overboard on the ground of delay. No order as to costs. tI

') Miscellaneous petitions pending, il any, shall stand closed. N. SRIHARI //// ASSISTAN EGISTRAR !;E ON OFFICER To 1. One CC to SRI RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJ|, Advocate tOpUCl 2- ONC CC tO SRI GADI PRA^VEEN KUTUAR, OCPUiV SOIICrrON'CTNERAL OF INDIA Advocate [OPUC] 3. one cc to SRI DoMtNrc FERNANDES, sENroR sc FoR cBrc Advocate loPUCl

Two CD Copies SA CJP % I \ I

HIGH COURT DATED:2710112025 ORDER WP.No.35196 of 2024 DISMISSING THE W.P AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS. ( jt:':neJc rlE sTAr +g l0 f .: 2'u:5 ri-..-: C ? 02 ,{ W \

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.