Agarwal Steels vs. The State Of Telangana
Held
The Court granted the permission sought by the petitioner's counsel to withdraw the Writ Petition. Consequently, the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also stated that there would be no order as to costs, and any pending miscellaneous petitions would stand closed. The specific legal arguments regarding the validity of the notice under Section 129(3) of the SGST Act, 2017, or the alleged violation of constitutional rights were not adjudicated upon due to the withdrawal of the petition. Therefore, no finding was made on the merits of the case, and no ratio decidendi can be extracted concerning the substantive issues raised.
Facts
The petitioner, Agarwal Steels, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana seeking a direction to release two seized vehicles, AP12V6397 and AP28X3092, along with their goods. The seizure was carried out by the Respondent, the Assistant Commissioner for State Tax, Sangareddy-II Circle. The petitioner challenged the notice dated 24/02/2020 issued by the Respondent, contending it was in violation of Section 129(3) of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and also violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also filed an interim application seeking the release of the vehicles. During the proceedings, the counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the action of the Respondent in issuing the notice dated 24/02/2020, leading to the seizure of vehicles AP12V6397 and AP28X3092, was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Section 129(3) of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notice and subsequent seizure were in violation of Section 129(3) of the SGST Act, 2017, and thus illegal, arbitrary, and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Respondent's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the Respondent. The counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition.
Sections Cited
Section 129(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT FOR THE S1 AT HYDE#JE DOF TELANGANA (Dpectat Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENIH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWEN;Y PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI()E ]VI.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD Between: Agarwal Ste Rao, Door Hyderabad. AND WRIT PETITIO N NO: 5349 0 F 2020 Rl3, ?:d !?1" ii?"J, ff J t:"ffS3" 0., n bT;ry, S,Prasad , S/o IDPL Facto ry, S.Krishna Balanagar, PETITIONER ]!9 Statq of Te_l?ngan_a Through it_s Assistant Commissioner for State Tax, Sangareddy-ll Crrcie, Sangaredl'dy District. - RESPONDENT Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to grant an order, directron or wril, more so in the nature of l\,4andamus, declaring the action of the Respondent in issuing the Notice daled 2410212020 in violation to Section 129 (3) of State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, issued by the Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent to release the vehicles seized i.e., AP12V6397 and AP28X3092 loaded with goods.
Petition under
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.