BharatTaxGST

Simhadri Venkata Kasi Visweswara Rao vs. The State Of Telangana

Original PDF →
WP/3574/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01006798202413 February 2024Bench: B.VIJAYSEN REDDY7 pages
For Petitioner: SRI SATHAKARNI K, counself ortheRespono.., ., l[.*t#flTn?o*r"ff?Tff, spEcrALGpFor Respondent: M/S SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GP, FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[ 3183 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY W.P.Nos. 3574 AND 3583 OF 2024 W.P.No.3574 of 2024 Between: Simhadri Venkata Kasi Visweswara Rao, S/o. Simhadri Venkata lr.abl_rgkgralao, Aged about.54 Years, Occ. Additional Commissioner (ST), Rr/o. H.No.8-3-191l556l54lc,Vengalrao Nagar, SR Nagar ,Hyderabad, T s 500038. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Telangana, rep by the Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT), Hyderabad. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Govt of Telangana, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the Memos dated 30.12.2023 in CCT's Peshi Ref.No.17Bl2023, dated 31 .O1 .2024 and O2.O2.2O24 in CCT's Ref No.D4l155l2O24 p-rima facie without any basis as illegal in seizing the Petitioner's mobile phone and directing her sub-ordinates to arrest the Petitioner or prepare a complaint to arrest the Petitioner without any basis or prima facie as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and not enforceable and consequently to direct the 2nd Respondent not to initiate such arbitrary action without any basis, iota of evidence, prima facie and without following due process of law. 2 lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section l5i 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 against the petitioner pursuant to the Memos dated 30.12.2023 in CCT's Peshi Ref.No.17Bl2O23, dateC 31 .0i.2O24 and 02.02.2024 in CCT's Ref No.D4l1 5512024 issued by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SATHAKARNI K counself ortheRespono..,.,l[.*t#flTn?o*r"ff?Tff,spEcrALGp WRIT PETITION NO: 3583 OF 2024 Between: Mr. Abbaraju Sivarama Prasad, S/o. Abbaraju Datta Krishna Saye, Aged about 55.Years,-Occ: De-puty Commissioner (ST), R/o. Flat NO. +.405, siili .lgy^el!, Hyder Nagar, Opp Chermas, Kukatpally, K.V. RangaredOy, f.S_ 50008s ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep by the Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT), Secretariat, Hyderabad The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Govt of Telangana, Hyderabad ,..RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances staied in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the Memos dated 3011212023 in CCT,s peshi Ref.No.'l7Bl2023, dated 31lo1to24 and o2to2t2o24 in ccTs Ref No.D4l155/2024 prima facie without any basis as illegal in seizing the petitioner's mobile phone and 2 directing her sub-ordinates to arrest the Petitioner or prepare a complaint to arrest the petitioner without any basis or prima facie as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and not enforceable and consequently to direct the 2d Respondent not to initiate such arbitrary action without any basis, iota of evidence, prima facie and without following due process of law' 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 against the petitioner pursuant to the Memos dated 3011212023 in CCT's Peshi Ref.No.17Bl2O23, dated 3110112024 and 0210212024 in CCT's Ref No.D4l155l2O24 issued by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SATHAKARNI K Counsel for the Respondents: M/S SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following: ORDER

HONOURABLB SRI JUSTICE B. VTJAYSEN REDDY W.P. Nos.3574 AND 3583 OF 2024 COMMON ORDER: (oRAL) Heard Mr. Sathakami .K, learned counsel for the petitioner in both the writ petitions, and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Govemment Pleader, appearing lor the respondents, and perused the material on record.

2.

The leamed Special Govemment Pleader submits that the rvrit petition is premature. 'I'here are serious allegations against the petitioners. The enquiry pursuant to Memos dated 10.12.2023 and 3l .01 .2024 issued to the petitioners is pending. In fact, the petitioners submitted reply to both thc lrernos. So far, neither a criminal case is registered nor any disciplinary action is initiated against the petitioners.

3.

It is further submitted by the learned Specral Govemment Pleader that apprehension of arrest of the petitioners is misplaced. The petitioners indulged in sevetal irregularities and illegalities by helping assessees including M/s. Bigteap Technologies Private Limited and caused huge loss to the State exchequer and that the petitioners shared confidential infonnation relating to modules of tax evasion ,i ,t;l , ,{f

w 2 girovi$@ by the Service Provider lv{/s. Plianto Technologies Private Limited, as such, the petitioners were called upon to submit their explanation. The respondents would follow due process of law if any penal action.is initiated against the petitioners.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that action of the respondents' authorities is mala fide. The petitioners are statutory authorities and their actions / decisions are in accordance with the Telangana Goods a1d Services Tax Act 2017 (TGST Act) and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (IGST Act). The learned coutlsel has submitted that mobile phones of the petitioners were also seized without conducting any enquiry or drawing any proceedings. 'fhus, action of the respondents' authority is apparen tly mala fide. In any case, entire information as sought by the respondents has been provided by the petitioners.

5.

Taking into consideration the peculiar circumstances, as it was alleged that the respondents' authorities may at any time arrest the petitioners and process has been initiated to illegally detain them under Section 69 of, the TSGST Act and as there was no assistance of the appearing for the respondents, this Couft passed rc,-.

J the interim order on 09.02.2024 directing respondent No.2 not to interfere with the personal liberty of the petitioners without following due process of law till 13.02.2024. However, today, as it is assured by the leamed Special Government pleader that no action so f'ar has been initiated and any action in future against the petitioners would be in accordance with the provisions of the TSGST Act, this Court is not inclined to continue the interim order dated 0g.02.2024 passed by this Court.

6.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of. at the admission stage itself, directing the respondents to follow due process of law if any action is sought to be taken against the petitioners under the provisions of the TSGST Act or any other law. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous. applications, if any, pending in these writ petitions stand closed. iama muR Y ,//' K.SRE ASSlST E ANT REGIS SECTION OFFICER "im#*tq,a#:mrr*tlgiri.*T;:'::i*:*,:#' Ii'w I

HIGH COURT DATED:1310212024 COMMON ORDER W.P.Nos.3574 AND 3583 OF 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS. e{rft4 a ! o I HE SIA ,€: 1 2 llAB 202[ ,+ t * * OES PAT C\\cO I k- ( 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.