M/S Grn Constructions PVT LTD vs. Commercial Tax Officer

Held

The Court noted that the petitioner's counsel, on instructions, submitted that the matter had been settled under a One Time Settlement Scheme introduced by the Government of Telangana. Consequently, the petitioner sought withdrawal of the writ petition. In light of this submission, the Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The Court did not delve into the constitutional validity of the provisions or the legality of the assessment order as the petition was withdrawn by the petitioner due to a settlement.

Facts

M/s GRN Constructions Pvt Ltd (the petitioner) filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Respondent No. 1) on July 24, 2018. This order confirmed a demand of INR 19,75,992/- for the financial year 2015-16 under the Telangana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001. The demand pertained to the purchase of transmission fluid, greases, gear oils, engine oils, and brake fluids. The petitioner argued that the definition of 'importer' under Section 2(1)(h) read with Section 3(1)(a) of the Act was unconstitutional, vague, arbitrary, and violated Articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution. They also contended that Section 174 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was ultra vires the Constitution's 101st Amendment Act, 2016, due to the omission of Entry 52 of List II of Schedule VII from September 16, 2016. Furthermore, the petitioner claimed the goods were not notified, the action was without jurisdiction, and violated Section 3(2) of the Act and Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Key Issues

1. Whether the definition of 'importer' under Section 2(1)(h) read with Section 3(1)(a) of the Telangana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001, is unconstitutional on grounds of vagueness, arbitrariness, and violation of Articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution of India. 2. Whether Section 174 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is ultra vires the Constitution's 101st Amendment Act, 2016, and devoid of legislative competence due to the omission of Entry 52 of List II of Schedule VII from September 16, 2016. 3. Whether the assessment order dated July 24, 2018, confirming a demand of INR 19,75,992/- for FY 2015-16 under the Telangana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001, is illegal, arbitrary, based on non-notified goods, violative of Section 3(2) of the Act, and without jurisdiction, thus violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the definition of 'importer' was unconstitutional, vague, arbitrary, and violated Articles 14 and 265. They also argued that Section 174 of the GST Act was ultra vires and lacked legislative competence. The assessment order was challenged as illegal, arbitrary, based on non-notified goods, and violative of Section 3(2) of the Act and Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Respondents' arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents.