Vangaveeti Srinivasa Rao vs. The Union Of INDIA

WP/8908/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01017330202404 April 2024Bench: SUJOY PAUL,N.TUKARAMJI4 pages

For Petitioner: SRI M. P. K. ADITYAFor Respondent: SRI GADI pRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF tNDtA

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, Vangaveeti Srinivasa Rao, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated December 20, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Nalgonda CGST Division. The impugned order pertains to the period 2015-16 and seeks to collect differential service tax, including cess, interest, and penalty. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without jurisdiction, was contrary to law, and was barred by limitation. The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. An interim application was also filed seeking a stay on the recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the impugned order.

Held

The Court did not decide the merits of the case. After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. The Court granted this request and permitted the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal. Consequently, the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty granted to the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy. No costs were imposed. The Court also ordered that any pending miscellaneous petitions in this writ petition would stand closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated December 20, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Nalgonda CGST Division, for the period 2015-16, is without jurisdiction and barred by limitation, thus being illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional? The petitioner argued that the order was passed without jurisdiction and was barred by the limitation period prescribed under the relevant law. The petitioner sought to declare the action of the respondent illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional. The respondents, represented by the Union of India and the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, were expected to defend the legality and validity of the impugned order. The judgment does not explicitly detail the arguments of the revenue, but their participation implies a defense of the order's validity.

Sections Cited

CGST

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) [ 3403 ] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 8908 OF 2024 Between: Vangaveeti Srinivasa Rao, S/o.Rangaiah, Occ. Business, Age.56 years, R/o.6-11912, Thamarabandapalern, Kodad Municipality, Suryapet District, Telangana -5o82oo ...PErrroNER AND 1. The Union of lndia, represented by its Finance NIinistry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi 2. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Nalgonda CGST Division, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate, 6-2-11 ,LPT I\/arket, Block -2, Sy.No.830/1 and 831, Hyderabad Road, Nalgonda -508001 Petition under Article 226 of the Constidtion of lndia ,r"iff:[:i''fll: circumstances stated:.in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or more particularly a Writ of ltrlandamus declaring the action of the Respondents No.2 in passing the impugned order in original No.3012023-24-Adjn.(AC)(S.Tax) dated 20-12-2023 under the CGST for the period 2015-16 in terms of provisions of including collection of differential service tax (inclusive of cess), interest and penalty without Jurisdiction contrary to law barred by limitatlon being illegal, arbitrary and u nco nstitutiona I lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 grant stay of all further proceedings, including collectron of differential service tax i (inclusive of cess), inte_rest and penalty, pursuant to the rmpugned orcter in original No. 30/2023-24 -Adjn.(AC)(S.Tax) dated 2O-12-2023 pending disposirt of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. P. K. ADITYA Counsel for Respondent No. 1: SRI GADI pRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF tNDtA Counsel for Respondent No. 2: SMT. B. SAPNA REDDy

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.89O8 of 2024 ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Sujoy Paul| Heard Sri M.Govind Reddy, learned counsei for the petitioner.

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdrau, the writ petition ',r.ith a liberty to avail the statutory remedy of appeal.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty as prayed for by the petitioner. No costs. ) Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. .C.PRAVEEN KUMAR AS SISTANT REGIS R //// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One

One

One 4- Two UU CC CC CD to Sri M P K Aditya Advocate [OPUC] to Sri Gadi Pravden Kumar, D'eputy Solicitor General of lndia [OPUC] to Smt. B. Sapna Reddy, Advocate(OPUC) Copies MBC MR

HIGH COURT DATED: 0410412024 s 1l\E SIAr-€ ( q o 12 JUL 2tril o J '- a€0 ORDER WP.No.8908 of 2024 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN, WITHOUT COSTS -) )DI,!^ 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.