Sri Chennakeshava Ceramics vs. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Mancherial Circle

WP/988/2025HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01001438202510 January 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,G.RADHA RANI5 pages

For Petitioner: SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHY, REP. FOR, SRI UPADHYAY RAGHAVENDERFor Respondent: SRI SWAROOP OORILI-4", SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Sri Chennakesava Ceramics, represented by its partner, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated July 22, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Mancherial Circle. This order demanded a tax of Rs. 9,06,692 (CGST Rs. 4,53,346 and SGST Rs. 4,53,346) along with interest for the financial year 2019-20. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without following due procedure under Section 65 read with Section 73 of the TGST and CGST Acts, and that it was beyond the time prescribed under Section 73(10) of the said Acts. The petitioner also challenged the validity of Telangana Government's G.O.MS No. 170 dated December 30, 2023, which adopted a CBIC notification extending limitation periods.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of statutory appeal. The Court directed that if the petitioner files an appeal before the appellate authority within 45 days from the date of the order, the appellate authority shall consider and decide the appeal on its merits. The appellate authority was explicitly instructed not to dismiss the appeal on the ground of limitation. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The order also stated that there would be no order as to costs, and any pending interlocutory applications were also closed. The Court did not delve into the substantive issues raised by the petitioner regarding the validity of the demand order or the government notification.

Key Issues

1. Whether the demand order dated July 22, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax) under Section 73 of the TGST and CGST Acts for the financial year 2019-20 is illegal, arbitrary, and barred by limitation, considering the procedural requirements of Section 65 and Section 73(10) of the Acts? 2. Whether the Telangana Government's G.O.MS No. 170 dated December 30, 2023, adopting the extension of limitation periods notified by CBIC, is ultra vires Section 168A of the CGST Act/TGST Act, irrational, unreasonable, and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 265 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the demand order was issued without adhering to the due procedure contemplated under Section 65 read with Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017/TGST Act, 2017. Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the demand was raised beyond the time prescribed under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, 2017/TGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also challenged the validity of G.O.MS No. 170 dated December 30, 2023, arguing it was ultra vires Section 168A of the CGST Act/TGST Act, irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 265 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice. Respondents' arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 50, Section 65, Section 73(10), Section 73(9), Section 168(4), Section 168A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 34301 Between: AND 1 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION NO: 9880F 2025 ...PETITIONER SRI CHENNAKESHAVA CERAM|CS, Represented by its partner Sri Venkateshwar Rao Merugu, H.No.12-360, 'Gouthami N;gar, Ma;;h;rial _ 504208. Dist. Mancherial. - The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Mancherial Circle, H.No. 1S27. 1st Floor, VyshnaM Complex, Nedr Flyover 6ridge, Manchenat - SOaZOA -'-' ' 'i' 2. The Commissioner of State Tax, State of Telagnana Commercial taxes complex, M J Road, Opposite Gandhi Bhavan, Nam-pally, Hyderabad. 3. The State of Telagnana, Represented by its princiole Secretarv to Govemment, Revenue CTD, Secreteriate, Hyd-erabad ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be ..,.l pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the order passed by the The Assistant commissioner (sr), Under Section 73 of the TGST and CGST Act, 2O1l vide reference no. 2D3607240773354 dated 22.07.2024 in demanding a tax of Rs.9,06,692/-(CGST Rs.4,53,346/-, and SGST Rs.4,53,3461) and beside leavy of interest under section 50 of the CGST Act,2017 as prescribed under section 73(9) of CGST Act' 201 7/TGsr Act,2017, for the Year financial year 2o19-20 without following the due procedure of the law contemplated under section 65 read with section 73 of CGST Act,2017ITGST Acr,201l, as beyond the time prescribed under section 73(10) of the CGST Act, 201 7/TGST Acr, 2o17 in consequence of the Notification No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 issued by the CBIC and adopted by Government of Telangana vide G.O.MS No.170 dated 30.12.2023 thereby extending the limitation under the provisions of Section 168(4) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (fot short, the CGST Act ot 2017) as illegal, ultra vires section 168A of the CGST Act, 20'17|TGST Act, 2017,irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable violated of article 14 of the constitution of lndia barred by limited and without lurisdiction by declaring the G.O.Ms. No.170 dated 30.12.2023 issued by the Government of Telangana as ultra vires section 1684 of the CGST Act,2017ITGST Acl, 2017 and violative of principles of Natural Justice part from being violative of Article 4, 19 and 265 of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same in the interests of iustice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 stay all further proceedings including any recovery, pursuant to the orderpassed by the respondent no.1 Under Section 73 of the TGST and CGST Act, 2017 vide reference no. 203607240773354 daled 22.07 .2024 in demanding a tax of Rs.9,06,692/-(CGST Rs.4,53,346/-, and SGST Rs.4,53,3461) and beside leavy of interest under section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017 as prescribed under section 73(9) of CGST Act, 2017ffGST Ac1,2017, for the Year financial Year 2O19'2O pending disposal of writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHY, REP. FOR SRI UPADHYAY RAGHAVENDER Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILI-4" SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX

The Court made the following: ORDER

1! ! TTIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AJTD THE HOIT'BLE DT. WSTICE G. RADTIA RANI WRIT PETITION No.988 of 2o25 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Sri Gajanand Chakravarthy, learned counsel represents Sri Upadhyay Raghavender, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for the respondents. 2. l,earned counsel for t]re petitioner at the outset submits that this matter is covered by recent order passed by this Court in W.P.No.2123 of 2024 and batch and it may be disposed of in same terms. 3 The other side has no objection

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of statutory appeal. If the appeal is preferred by the petitioner within 45 days from today before the appellate authority, the said authority shall consider and decide the appeal on merits and it shall not be thrown overboard on the ground of [mitation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case. There shall be no order as to costs. \

2 Interlocutory applications, if any pending' shall also stand closed. "''i;$,ti'lst'.kl3'[xR ,I'// sECTloN UFFICER '"',,H""l'u'i'.li,li'f ufl i:ilis:f iiFJ"?tffi:'"X'""1L:Hl":$|'"';u1""''o ,:5:",?":,:il5'i"":?:!listm'ffi :',:ll'3H???il1'.93#S*iartaxe . H:J[:::ii,,:::'*ti":l"o*"1 :"u"n'" crD' secreteriate'

ONE CC tO SRI ,OOO*"I'RAGHAVENDER, AdVOCAIE IOPUC] 5 rwo "". . uS^tyff""?:""":rum*froJrto* SrArE rAX' High - Court for the State c

BSR BS Two CD CoPies IP i

HIGH COURT DATED: 1010112025 ORDER WP.No.988 ot 2025 R 1 H h: sirq 14: c (r) J " "', tt]u )a, t) t: -:a- 2 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS {* L..-., ,r< 1c"qra i ! I : I Ii I I !:j I i I i

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.