BharatTaxGST

M/S. Rbr Associates vs. Commissioner Of Customs And Central Taxof Customs And Central Tax

Original PDF →
WP/1436/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01002615202422 January 2024Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,N.TUKARAMJI6 pages
For Petitioner: SRI M.NAGA DEEPAK, co u nse I ro r the Res po no" ", ", (::'"o"? EIII, :: t*] 3"i ?;., r, "

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[ 337s ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 1436 OF 2024 Between: M/s. RBR Associates, 2-5412, Flal No. 204, 2nd Floor, Kalka Chambers, Jagadamba Nilayam, Miyapur, Hyderabad - 500050. Represented by its Partner Mr. Madderla Ram Bhupal Reddy, S/o. Madderla Krishna Reddy, Aged about 43 Years, Rl/o. Hyderabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax Appeals - ll, Hyderabad Commissionerate, 7th Floor, GST Bhavan, L.B.Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500004. 2. Qe_p-t'{y Commissioner of Central Tax, Gachibowli Division, Ranga Reddy CGST Commissionerate, 10-3-301-303, 4th Floor, Serene Heights, Humayun Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 3. Commissioner of Central Taxes, Ranga Reddy Commissionerate, Posnett Bhavan, Tilak Road, Abids, Hyderabad. ...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, direction or order more particularly in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring filing and registration of the appeal No. 3412O22-RR-ST(D) and the consequent Order ln Appeal No. HYD-SWAX-RR-AP2-482-2O23-24 dated 2011112023 by the Respondent No. 'l and consequently set aside the same. 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 stay the collection of tax pursuant Order ln Appeal No. HYD-SWAX-RR-Ap2-482-2023- 24 dated 2011112023 by the Respondent No. '1 . Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.NAGA DEEPAK co u nse I ro r the Res po no" ",", (::'"o"? EIII,:: t*] 3"i ?;. " r, ",

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAII KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.1436 of 2024 ORDER: (per Hon,bte Sri Justrce p,SAM KOSHy) The present writ petition has been hled assailing the impugned order dated 2O.|L2O23 (Annexure p6) passed by the respondent No.1 - The Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax (Appeals_Il).

2.

Heard Sri M. Naga Deepak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC appearing for the respondent _ Department.

3.

Vide the said impugned order, respondent No.1 has allowed

the appeal frled by the Department and set aside the order passed by the adjudicating authority.

4.

At the frrst instance, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition on the simple ground that the impugned order is an appealable order and the appeal would lie to the Appellate Tribunal under Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 (for short, ,the Act,).

5.

Learned counsel lor the petitioner though argued that the Tribunal under the GST Law rvhich has not become functional and 2 as such the petitioner would be remediless as Iong as the Appellate Tribunal is not established.

6.

The said contention of leafned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted for the simple reason that under Section 17 4(21(l the repeal and savings clause under the GST Act, the makers of the statute have categorically held, that the repeal of the Act shall not affect any of the proceedings including that relating to an appeal instituted before on or after the date under the said amended act or repealed act and as such the proceedings shall be continued under the said amended act or repcaled acts as if this act had not come into force and the said acts have not been amended or repealed. Which in other words means that when the statutory authorit5z themselves has entertained an application under Section 85 of the Act for the purpose of availing an appeal before the Commissioner, the natural corollary that would follow would be the next appellate forum under the same provision of law i.e., under Section 86, to the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'CESTATJ which undisputedly is functional as on date and is also entertaining the appeals arising out oforders passed by the Commissioner under Section 85 of the Act.

) 3 To,

7.

Since the peLitioner has a forum of appeal available before the CDSTAT, the present writ petition is rejected, reserving the right of the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. C. PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// SECTION OFFICER

1.

One CC to SRI M.NAGA DEEPAK, Advocate fOPUCl

2.

One CC toSRt DOMIN'iC-*iEilNANDas, ('senior'standing counsel For cBrc). [oPUC]

3.

Two CD Copies. BSK GJP $

HIGH COURT DATED:2210112024 ORDER WP.No.1436 of 2024 REJECTING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS [Ootu ge .,k ( S E t1 R t!,'l 7 * \'- T4 2[l/1 ot' i fl 0 o ,.) > o ", aft\1

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.