BharatTaxGST

Domakonda Madhusudhan vs. The Deputy /Assistant Commissioner (St)

Original PDF →
WP/36972/2024HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01071987202402 January 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,G.RADHA RANI5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR, Counset forthe Respondent No.1 & 3: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[ 3430 J HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE I i I I I I I I I I i i : Z I i I I PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION NO:36972OF 2024 Between: DOMAKONDAMADHUSUDHAN,S/o.DOMAKONDARAJAIAH,Aged.about 5s'iilr',ibtc_ rji,iin"ss, nyo. rrit No. 45, Ground Floor, srikanth Nilayqm, ffi.'h;; Rffiy N;;;;-Bb*;pattv, nvoeratao, Telansana-Soo 011 Financial Yeat- 2019-20 ,.,PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy /Assistant Commissioner (ST), Begumpet Division' Bowenpally- ll ' Ciiir.,-'or'"ens Plaza, s.p. no"u' eqjump-et, Secundrabad' Hyderabad- 500003. 2- Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Represent'ed by its Secretary' North Block' New Delhi-1 10001 3. State of Telangana' Through Principal ggcr.etary to Government Revenue Department (Commercial Tax) Hyderabad, I elangana' 4. The Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing' New Delhi Rep bY its Commissioner ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue. a) a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring impugned Order vide Ref No' 7:D36Cf,24143161K dated 30.OB.2024passedbythelstRespondentundertheprovisionsofCGSTffGST Acl,2OlTasbeingvoid,arbitrary,illegal,withoutjurisdiction'violativeofthe principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 1a 19(1)(g) and 265oftheConstitutionoflndia,andtoconsequentlysetasidethesame' b) a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the Notification No. 09/2023-C.T dated 31 .03.2023 issuedbyRespondentNo.3throughRespondentNo.4andcorrespondingGo Ms. No. .t 18 dated 21i.o8.2023 issued by Respondent No. 3, which extended the time limit for passing the orders, are without authority of law and ultra vires to the section 73(10) of the GST Act 2017 and Section 1684 of GST Act, 2017 and violative of articles 1 4, 19(1 Xg) 21 and 265 of the constitution of lndia. lA NO: 2 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 stay operation of order vide Ref No. 2D360824143161K daled 3ologl2o24 passed by Respondent No. 1 in DRC-07. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR Counset forthe Respondent No.1 & 3: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: SRI B.MUKHERJEE' REP. FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERTAL OF INDIA Counsel forthe Respondent No.4: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, Sr. SC FOR CBIC

The Court made the following: ORDER

I I 1 l. i t I I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AITD THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION No.36972 of2o24 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar, learned counsel for tfre petitioner; Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for respondent Nos.1 and 3; Sri B' Mukhe{ee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No'2 and Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, for respondent No.4. 2. The principal ground of attack in this petition is to the Notification No.9 of 2023, dated 31.O3.2O23' This Court, today' pronounced a common order dealing with the validity of tJ:e said notification in W.P.No.2123 of 2024 and batch' Thus, no interference is required on said notification' So far other grounds on merits and otherwise are concerned, they can be raised in appeal.

3.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal' If the appeal is preferred within 15 clays from today, Iearned appellate authority shall entertain it on merits artcl shall not dismiss it on the ground

2 of delay. It is; made clear tleat this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. . A.SRINIVASA REDDY ASSI REGISTRAR ,T// otr orRCen To, ,1i8,3",,gr"Li"J'F,el::Tfl nfl313:(3JJ;R??YIE:'"3":F"*.*ff13'Xy;Jl , 1::t::.,"'ary, Ministry of Finance' North Block' New Delhi Union of lndia- '1lilO*t**"::?$ru#":s',:",$?tLln?X?i'"Department(commerciar 4 The Commissioner' Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs' GST Policy " wfis:ii;il'D;rhi'

5.

One CC to SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR' Advocate IOPUCI

6.

One CC to SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' Sr' SC FOR CBIC IOPUCI ,3pi-"fi il,i[ls]Hi"m:E}51Yth3"',LTl,i?ii3[?5't'd'"^' , H:*:3.i*:l s5l"'y+5335"3?,1"ht;,?!5,o3?,'o* SrArE rAX' Hish

9.

Two CD CoPies BSRw rlr c

HIGH COURT DATED: 0210112025 .q)' 1il k wz. ((\t- ,-! -) .) ot 10 rt! mzs ORDER WP.No.36972 ot 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT GOSTS * ) :i' j ir - ai- \\i=__;2, 1ecod4 &-. t I I I i ! 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.