Bhavani Constructions vs. Union Of INDIA

WP/34258/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01066268202407 January 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,G.RADHA RANI4 pages

For Petitioner: SRI RAMAVARAM CHANDRASHEKAR REDDYFor Respondent: SRI PULIMAMIDI SHASHIDHAR REDDY

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, Bhavani Constructions, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated August 23, 2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of CT, CGST Siddipet Division. This order levied differential tax of 7% on works contract services provided by the petitioner for the tax period 2019-20. The petitioner contended that this demand was contrary to G.O.Ms. No. 67 IAD dated July 4, 2018, and violated constitutional rights. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare the order illegal and arbitrary, and to direct respondents 2 and 4 to 6 (State of Telangana, Telangana State Housing Corporation, and Irrigation and Command Area Department) to pay the impugned demands to the credit of the 3rd respondent (Assistant Commissioner). The petitioner also sought a stay of further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order.

Held

The Court did not delve into the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to file a properly constituted petition. The other respondents had no objection to this request. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The liberty to file a properly constituted petition was granted as prayed for. No order as to costs was made. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated August 23, 2024, levying differential tax of 7% on works contract services provided by the petitioner for the tax period 2019-20 is illegal, arbitrary, improper, and unfair, violating Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India, contrary to G.O.Ms. No. 67 IAD dated July 4, 2018? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was illegal and arbitrary, violating fundamental constitutional rights. They specifically relied on G.O.Ms. No. 67 IAD dated July 4, 2018, asserting that the demand was contrary to this government order. The petitioner sought a declaration of illegality and a direction for payment of the demand by the concerned government departments. Revenue/State's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue or state respondents in opposition to the petitioner's claims.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 34301 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH 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: 34258 OF 2024 Between: Bhavani constructions, Rep by Madhusudhan Reddy S/oMalla Reddy, Aged about 50 years, Occ. Business, No 4-1431 1A, Prashanthnagar, Raghvendranagar, Siddipet District, Telangana. ...,.PETITIONER AND 1. Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Finance 4111 Floor Awing Shastri Bhawan New Delhi 110001 . 2. State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary lrrigation and Command Area Department Secretariat Building, Saifabad Hyderabad, Telangana State. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of CT, CGST Siddipet Division, Nizambad, Telangana. 4. The Managing Director, Telangana State Housing Corporation D No. 36184 St No. 17 Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad. 5. The Chief Engineer, Telangana State Housing Corporation D No. 36184 St No. 17 Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad. 6. The Engineer in Chief Inigation and Command Area Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 7. The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Medak District, 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 WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring commanding the impugned Order Vide Ref No. 2D360824089565R dated. 23lOBl20241evying differential tax of 7(Percent) on the works contract services provided by the Petitioner for the tax period 2019-20 without payment by R2 and 4 to 6 contrary to G.O.Ms. No. 67 IAD dated O4l07l2O1B as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unfair, violating articles 14, 19(1Xg), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 4 to 6 to pay the impugned demands to the credit of the 3rd respondent in terms of impugned Order Vide Ref No. 2D360824089565R dated. 2310812024. l.A.NO:'f OF 2024 Petition Under Section 'l 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all Further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Order Vide Ref No. 2D360824089565R dated. 2310812024,pending disposal of the writ petition or else the petitioner would be put to severe loss and hardship and pass, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAMAVARAM CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI PULIMAMIDI SHASHIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 6 : G.P FOR IRRIGATION AND COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI B.SHIVA KUMAR, SPL G.P FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : SRI MD.HANEEF FARHAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI KIRAN REDDY MALLARAPU Counsel forthe Respondent No.7 : G.P FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ

The Court made the following ORDER

I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION No.34258 OF 2o24 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Si Justice SujoA Paul) Sri Ramavaram Chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to lile a properly constituted petition.

The other side has no objection.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as w.ithdrawn with liberty prayed for. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. IA. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// S OFFICER To 7 SA BS

Two CC's to G'P FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ' High Court for the State of Telanoana at Hyderabad. (OUT) ,. i;;'ic:;1;'C.F ionlnitcAfroN AND cor/TMAND AREA DEVELoPMENT, nigh ioL;' roi ih" dtuG or rgl?lsq[1{. ilv.derabad (oUT) 3. 5;;e-c t" SCr nnrra"nvAnarrl cHANDRASHEKARREDDY' Advocate IOPUCI b;""di to SRI PULIMAMIDI sHASHIDHAR REDDY' Advocate-[oPUC] il; 6c i6 siii rrnnr.r iErioi runrmnnq!,-{op^c3!9 (oP-uq) - . . . il;6c i" srii ti.sHrvn xur,rnn, SFl e 'p FoR coMMERCIAL rAx (oPUC) Two CD CoPies -r 4 5 6

HIGH COURT DATED:0710112025 ORDER WP.No.34258 of 2024 )o 1 B ttB 7fl75 II{?*- 1i\6 STAI€ ( q I / oESPA-I DISMISSING THE W.P AOS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS. // ,/' _d a;7,r,,*r i I /a.

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.