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

WP/35200/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01068300202427 January 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJIFor Respondent: SRI DOMINtC FERNANDES, SC FOR CBIC

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Nichino Chemical India Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court challenging an Order-in-Original dated August 26, 2024, and a corrigendum dated August 29, 2024, issued by the 4th Respondent (Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Sangareddy). These orders pertained to bunched-up years from 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22, and also an effectual summary of order in FORM GST DRC-07 dated September 14, 2024, for the period April 2019-March 2020, issued under Section 74 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017. The petitioner sought to declare these actions illegal, non-est in law, arbitrary, and violative of natural justice, and to quash them. A separate application sought to suspend the effectual summary of order pending disposal of the writ petition.

Held

The Court did not decide the substantive issues raised by the petitioner regarding the legality and fairness of the impugned orders. Instead, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the Writ Petition. The petitioner further 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 learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents had no objection to this request. Consequently, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn.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 reject it solely on the ground of delay. No costs were awarded.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Order-in-Original dated August 26, 2024, the corrigendum dated August 29, 2024, and the effectual summary of order in FORM GST DRC-07 dated September 14, 2024, issued under Section 74 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, are illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were illegal, non-est in law, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice. The specific grounds for these contentions were not detailed in the provided text, but the prayer indicates a challenge to the validity and fairness of the proceedings and orders. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Deputy Solicitor General of India and Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, did not object to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition and pursue an appeal.

Sections Cited

Section 74

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD '" (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVi '-" ' NO 60 and epresented by [ 3446 ] 61, IDA, D.Harinath PRESENT WRIT PETITION NO: 35200 0F 2024 circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other direction declaring the a) action of 4th Respondent in i ln-Original No. 12612024-25-GST_ADJN-SGRD|V DtN. THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA Between: Ir//s. Nichino Chemical lndia private Limited, plot Pashamytaram. Sangareddy, reirngini l"'sb"ziol' a Reddy S/o Late Krish"na n",ijv age +?iluo "dlJ"i.o AND 1. Union of lndia. Reo bv its Secre_tary, Ministry of Finance. Department of Revenue, North Brbc(, c";tr;i s;;*;iir]. ft""*,o"rni _ .l .10 001 2 Centrai Board of Indirect raxes and customs. Rep by irs chairman, Ir,4inistrv B:ili:i:t ir",iartment "r R";;;;. N;,# e'ioci]ucunt,.,r secretariar. New. 3. The Principal Commissio-ner of Central Tax, Central Excise and Service Tax, Medchat GST Commissionerate, Hy;;r;;;"""""' 4. The Deputy/Assista nt Cgmmissioner of Central Tax. Sangareddv CGST Division, IVedchat cGST commissionerate. ptot No. 5Ia."5sRx;;8,, Matrusri Nasar, Miyapur. Hya;r;b;; 'sbijdab "''"' 5. The Assistant Commissioner.of Central Tax, Circle_Vll, Audit - [ Commissionerate. Dooi No. t-eslB)rd2i. 3;;i;;;r", pride, Krirhika L a yo u t, [V a d h a p u r, H i te c h C i t V, H vO e ra' O-a O _Iij Oijaf ' .....PETITIONER the High Court may be appropriate writ, order or ssuing bunched up Order_ 20240856YQ0 0007027 46 .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the t daled 2610812024 along with subsequent Corrigendum to Order-ln-Original vide DlN. 20240856YQ0000823648 dated 2910812024 for bunched up years from 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 and consequential effectual summary of order in FORM GST DRC-07 vide Ref No. 2D360924014998R dated 14tO9t2OZ4 for the period April 2019-il,4arch2020 under Section 74 of the CGST/SGSI Act,2017, issued by the 4th Respondent as being illegal, non-est in law, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural .lustice and consequently quash the same. Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the effectual summary of order in FO Rtr,,l GST DRC-07 vide Ref No. 2D360924014998R dated 1410912024 for the PeriodAprit 2ol9- March 2020 under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 issued by the 4thRespondent pending the disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJI counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR. DEpuTy SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 : SRI DOMINtC FERNANDES, SC FOR CBIC

The Court made the following ORDER 7 I l.A.NO:1 OF 2024

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SU.JOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION No.352OO of 2o24 ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justtce Sujou Paul) Sri Salvaji Raja Shekar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing 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. I I rl -- - -_),

) \ Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, sha11 stand closed. .N. SRIHARI ASSIS'TAN REGISTRAR i//i (: c ION OFFICER To SA GJP

One CC to SRI RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJ|, Advocate tOpUCl

ONE CC tO SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPY SOLICITbR GENERAL OF lNDlA, Advocate IOPUC]

One CC to SRI DON/IN|C FERNANDES, SC FOR CBIC Advocate tOpUCl

Two CD Copies @; r

HIGH COURT DATED:2710112025 ORDER 3IVd53 1 + $ Ee0z 8lJ 0 t ] ' vi a --lr{ i_ (1 iHE S r!./l,TCre9 WP.No.35200 of 2024 DISMISS!NG THE W.P AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS. ::)z ::-:-'-:ja :, 10 iis ?05 t\ tr > t d\,( I I I 3f. ]l !l

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.