M/S.Siflon Drugs Private Limited vs. Appellate Joint Commissioner(St)
Original PDF →Facts
M/s. Siflon Drugs Private Limited (Petitioner) filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court challenging notifications issued by the Central and State Governments, and subsequent orders passed by the revenue authorities. The Petitioner sought to declare these notifications and orders as ultra vires, arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction. The Petitioner also sought a direction for the Appellate Tribunal to admit their appeal once constituted. The disputed tax amount was Rs. 5,39,293. The Petitioner requested a stay on the collection of this amount. During the hearing, the parties reached a consensus to dispose of the petition in terms of a previous order passed in another writ petition.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition based on a consensus reached by the parties, directing the Petitioner to deposit 10% of the tax liability as assessed by the Assessing Officer within four weeks. The Petitioner was also directed to approach the Tribunal within three months from its constitution. The Tribunal was instructed to decide the second appeal in accordance with the law. Crucially, the Court clarified that no coercive action would be taken against the Petitioner until the Tribunal's decision, subject to the deposit of 10% of the tax liability. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The issue of the validity of the notifications and the legality of the orders was not decided on merits due to the consensus and the procedural disposal.
Key Issues
1. Whether Notification No. 9/2023 - Central Tax dated 31-03-2023, issued by the Central Government, is ultra vires the Central Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017 and invalid? 2. Whether Notification vide G.O. Ms. No. 118 dated 25-08-2023, issued by the State of Telangana, is ultra vires the Telangana Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017 and invalid? 3. Whether the order-in-appeal (Order No. 2D361124021176T dated 21-11-2024) and the order-in-original (Order No. 2D361223061206Q dated 29-12-2023) are arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and contrary to Sections 9, 16, and Rule 26 of the Telangana Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's contentions: The Petitioner argued that the notifications and subsequent orders were illegal and without jurisdiction. They sought to have these declared invalid and set aside. Alternatively, if the notifications were held valid, they prayed for a direction to the Appellate Tribunal to admit their appeal. Respondents' contentions: The judgment records no specific contentions from the respondents. However, the parties reached a consensus during the hearing.
Sections Cited
Section 9, Section 16, Rule 26, Section 109, Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADIIA RANI WRIT PETITION No.37125 of 2024 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Ms. S.N. Sreedevi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for respondent Nos. I to 3 and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.4. 2. During the course of hearing, learned cbunsel for the parties reached to a consensus. It is agreed that this petition may be disposed of in terms of order passed in W.P.No.360O of 2024. t I
Accordingly, as agreed, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to deposit IOVo of the tax liability as assessed by the Assessing Officer and deposit the same \,\ith the Department within four weeks from today. The petitioner shail approach the Tribunal within three months from the date of its constitution/ establishment. The Tribunai shall decide the second appeal in accordance with law. Further, subject to depositing lOo/o of the tax liability within a,foresaid time, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner till the decision of the Tribunal in the second appeal. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits oI the case. No costs. \
2 Misceilaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand I .A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// N OFFTCER closed. To 1 'TheAppellateJointCommissione(ST)'HyderabadRuralDivision,SthFloor' C.T. CdmPlex, NamPallY, HYderqbqd. . i6" nrii.I"nt'comririssiondr (ST), Madhapur -1 Circle, Madhapur Division, 4th Floor Gagan Vihar, Nampally, Hyderabad ; . iiil pii""ipiisecretary, RevenJe, Revenue Department, Secretariat' Saifabad, State of Telangana at Hyderabad - . . ifiii n"ih"" Secretary, [lnion of lndia, North Blo-ck, New Delhi' . One cc to Ms S.N.SF{EEDEVI, Advocate [OPUC]- - . O;; CC iO SNI SWNNOOP OORILLA, SP.ECIAL GOVT PLEADER FOR 2 3 4q 6 STATE TAX Advocate [OPUC] z. one ct to SRI GADI P'RAVEEN KUMAR, Advocate (oPUC) B. Two CD CoPies SA BS ? r4- \
HIGH COURT DATED:0310112025 ORDER WP.No.37125 ot 2024 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. ri:i- i TA 1 .! tJ 0 3 F; ii 2025 z x .ri t 2, V+ ptt{rs- Io Cs(ul ,
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.