Moon Enterprises vs. The State Of Telangana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad, aggrieved by a show cause notice dated February 19, 2024, issued by Respondent No. 5 (Deputy State Tax Officer) for the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration. The petitioner claimed to have sought further time to file a detailed response to the show cause notice, but a copy of this response was not placed on record. The petition also mentioned the detention/seizure of stock under an Order of Prohibition dated February 17, 2024, by respondents 3 and 4, seeking its release. However, the court's order primarily addresses the show cause notice for GST registration cancellation.
Held
The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this juncture, as the primary grievance was against a show cause notice for cancellation of GST registration. The Court noted that the petitioner had not yet filed a detailed response to the notice, despite claiming to have sought further time. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to appear before Respondent No. 5 and submit its detailed reply within seven days from the date of the order. If the reply is filed, the respondent authorities are permitted to proceed further in accordance with the law and pass appropriate orders after verifying the contents of the reply. The issue regarding the detention/seizure of stock was not explicitly addressed in the operative part of the order, as the petition was disposed of on the basis of the show cause notice.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition interdicting with a show cause notice for cancellation of GST registration at this juncture, given that the petitioner has not yet filed a detailed response. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the action of the respondents in issuing the show cause notice for cancellation of registration and detaining/seizing stock was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of natural justice, seeking to set aside these actions and secure the release of the seized stock. The petitioner sought directions to prevent coercive steps and to release the detained stock forthwith. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents. It notes that the petitioner submitted it had sought further time to file a detailed response and that no developments had transpired beyond the issuance of the show cause notice.
Sections Cited
GST REG-17
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER i
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAIVIJI WRIT PETITION No.5740 0F 2024 ORDER:@er Ho n'ble Srt Justice P.SAM KOSHfl) The instant Writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the show cause notice, dated 19.02.2024, issued by respondent No.S, so far as the cancellation of the GST Registration of the Petitioner is concemed.
A perusal of the record would show that though the petitioner submits that it has given its response to the show cause notice, but the copy of the same is not placed on record. The petitioner further submits that it has not given its detailed response and has sought further time to hle a detailed response. Meanwhile,.there does not seem to have been aly developments that have transpired beyond the issuance of show cause notice.
In tl.e given circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ petition interdicting with the show cause notice, dated 19.02.2024, at this juncture. The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.5 and \ \ 0I
2 .PSI<,J & NTR,J W.P.No.574O of 2024 submit its detailed reply, if it has till date not filed, within a period of seven (07) days from today. If the petitioner f-rles its reply, the respondent-authorities may proceed further in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, after due verification of the contents of the reply to the show cause notice.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. //// . R. KARITHIKEYAN / ASSISTAN G SECTI OFFICER r\ To,
The Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana, Hyderabad SOOO22. 2. The CommisCioner of Commercial Tax, CT Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad 500044
The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Rajendranagar Circle.1, Saroornaoar Division, Btock M-4, rt Ftoor, Mantiranla'n Compiei, tr,t.l.'-nijral-r.r1",iip-"Yli, Hyderabad 500001. 4. The Joint Commissioner (ST), SaroomagarDivision,Ranga Reddy District 5. rhe Deputy State Tax otticei,3a;q4r_a-iisai'-[ sjrd6ii'rgrr, rioeiauia 6. one C_C ro sRt SYED Mou-Nis JAr-en AelDl, Ao-r6"aie. 16eui1-- ----
Two CCs to the Gp for Commerciat fixes, Hibtr Ctuh for-itre State Of _ Telan_gana at Hyderabad. [OUT]
Two CD Copies. @
HIGH COURT PSK,J & NTR,J DATED:0510312024 CC TODAY 1tlI STAI€ 0 7 ltAB 2[ll ft- fra q Joo t:) ORDER WP.No.5740 ot 2024 DISPOSING OE THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS t.r, .\ ,b.!= .L 21
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.