M/S Yash Pigments Limited (Formerly, M/S Yash Pigments LLP) vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Held
The Court noted that during the hearing, the learned counsel for the parties reached a consensus. It was agreed that the impugned show-cause notices and the final orders passed under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, would be set aside. The respondents were granted liberty to issue fresh show-cause notices, and the petitioner was permitted to file a comprehensive reply. The department was also reserved the liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. The Court made it clear that it had not expressed any views on the merits of the case. The time consumed in the writ petitions would not be a hurdle for the department in counting limitation for issuing fresh notices.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Yash Pigments Limited, filed multiple writ petitions before the Telangana High Court challenging orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. These orders pertained to tax periods 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22, and 2022-23. The petitioner argued that the orders were arbitrary, without jurisdiction, vague, lacked valid reasons, and violated principles of natural justice and constitutional provisions. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner (ST), the Commissioner of State Taxes, and the State of Telangana. The matters were heard analogously due to the similarity of issues.
Key Issues
1. Whether the orders passed under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) are arbitrary, bad in law, without jurisdiction, vague, and violative of principles of natural justice and constitutional provisions (Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the orders were fundamentally flawed, lacking proper reasoning and procedural fairness. They sought to declare these orders as non-est in law and prayed for their setting aside. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records a consensus reached between the parties, indicating that the revenue did not contest the petitioner's claims on merits during the hearing. The consensus was that the impugned notices and orders should be set aside.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[ 3430 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION NOs: 26325 25869 26425 &26466 0F 2024 Between: M/s Yash Pigments Limited, (formerly, M/s Yash Pigments LLP)' M No 7-4-1 17l9' Sy. No. 246, 249, 250 and 251,-Gaganpahad, Rajendra Nagar, Hydejabad, Ringareddy Districi - 500 077, Telangana. Represented by its Director, Nlr. Rajesh Bansal, S/o Mr. Srinivas Bansal. ...PEIITIONER W.P.No.26325 OF 2024 AND 1 2 The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Abids Circle, Hyderabad, Old Kakatiya Hotel Building, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500 001, Telangana The Commissioner of State Taxes, State of Telangana, Commercial Taxes Complex, M.J. Road, Opposite Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500
The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary^ ^!o Government, RevenueiCT-ll) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad - 50O 022' Telangana. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.