Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[ 3311 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION NO: 20605 OF 2021
Between:
Qualcomm lndia Private Limited, rep. by its Senior Director, Finance, Mr. Ravi
Rao Velidanda, 5th Floor, Building No.8, K. Raheja l.T. Park, lvlindspace
Cyberabad, HITECH City, Madhapur, Hyderabad 500 081
...PETITIONER
AND
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Deputy Commissioner (ST) STU-Ill, Hyderabad (Rural) Division, Hyderabad.
Commissioner of State Taxes, C.T. Complex, Nampally, State of Telangahra,
Hyderabad 500 001.
Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad
C.T. Complex, Nampally, State of Telangana, Hyderabad 500 001 .
Central Board of lndirect Taxes And Customs, Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi 1 10 001
State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue
(CT-ll) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Union of lndia, Through its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of
Finance, Govemment of lndia, Central Secretariat, North Block, New Delhi -
110001.
...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 it is prayed that the For the reasons stated above, it is prayed that- (i)
the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the Circular No. 139/09/2020-GST
dated 10.06.2020 and Circular No. 135i05/2020- GST dated 31.03.2020 issued
by the Respondent No. 4,as beingex - facie erroneous, illegal, bad rn law,
unjustandin conflict with Rule 36(4) of the GGST Rules, (ii) the Honble court may
be pleased to declare that circular No. 139/09/2020-GST dated 10.06.2020 and
Circular No. 135/05/2020- cST dated 31.03.2020 issued by the Respondent No.
4 will have no application on the refund claims pertaining to the period prior to
their insertion, (iii) the Honble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of
Mandamus or any other appropnate writ or order or direction declaring the (i)
Order dated 30.12.2020 in Appeal No R/3/2019-20/GST-Refund, (ii) Order dated
30.12.2020 in Appeal No. R/4/2019-20/GST-Refund, (iii) Order dated 30.12.2020
in Appeal No. R/5/2019-20/GST-Refund, (iv) Order dated 30.12.2020 in Appeat
No. R/6/2019-20/GST-Refund, (v) Order daled 30.12.2020 in Appeat No.
Wllzl1g-2}lcST-Refund, (vi) Order dated 30.12.2020 in Appeat No. R/B/2019-
20lGST-Refund, (vii) Order dated 30 12.2020 in Appeat No. R/12l20'tg-2OlcsT-
Refund, (viii) Order dated 30..12.2020 in Appeal No. R/13i2019-20/GST-Refund,
and (ix) Order dated 30.122020 in Appeat No. R/1412019-20/GST-Refund
passed by the Respondent No. 3, to the extent they reject refund claim of the
Petitioner of ITC availed on invoices not getting reflected in Form GSTR-2A, as
being ex - facie erroneous, arbitrary, absurd, unjust, suffers from infirniity,
without jurisdiction and without the authority of law, and/or otherwise untenable
and unsustainable in law and set aside the same, (iv) the Honble Court may be
pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or
direction ordering and directing the Respondents to sanction refund to the
Petitioner of lnput Tax Creditavailed on invoices not getting reflected in Form
GSTR-2A on the strength of hard copy of the invoices and further grant interest
on such.delayed sanction of refund amount, and (v) the Honble Court may be
pleased to.
lA NO: 1 OF 2021
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,
by an interim order and injunction of this Hon'ble court, direct the Respondents
to sanction refund to the petitioner, as sought by the petitioner, on such terms
and conditions as this Hon'ble court may deem fit, pending disposar of the writ
Petition, as otherwise the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship_
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. VIVEK CHANDRA SEKHAR S
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 5: SRl. V. RAJESHWAR RAO
Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRl. GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY
SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
) ) THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHIIYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JI'STICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.2O6O5 of 2O2L ORDER: Pe. th,' IlorL'ble the (''tue/Jusrr.(' ttltdl Bht4lan) Heard Mr. Prasad Paranjape, learned counsel for the petitioner and NIr. V.Rajcslrn'ar Rao, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 5 2. lt is sr-rbmitted that alter filing of this u'rit petition, State of Telangana has issue d a circular dated 27 .I2 -2022 which has s ubstantia-l1v redressed the grievance of the petitioner. ll is therefore submitted that in terms of the aforesaid circular, matter may be remanded back to the authority for a lresh decision,
2.The Commrssroner of State Taxes' C T Complex' Nampally' State of -' Telanqana' HYderabad 500 001 ' 3. i#d;;iLi;JJrt i;;;isitner (sr)' Hvderabad Rural Division' "Hfi;;55;ef.-c#;[;,'Nilpirrilsi'ateorrelansana'Hvderabad500 001. +. if,e'Central Board of lndirect Taxes And Custorns' Mili-slry of Finance' Deoartment ot Revenue''North Block' New Delhi 1 I0 001 s. rh6 principat Secretal;to 6;r"ii.|-*dhi,ii"r"nue (Cr-tt) Department, State of 6 il;s'#;tff L,;i";?'l;J;' oJpirt'ent ot Revenue' Ministrv of Finance' Govemment ot rnoial6eniiJ'$;"efie!' i't"rth Block' New'De'lhi - 110 001' ?. 5i; Cc'i; 'sti. V'r"i cninorl Sekhar s'-Advocate [oPUc] 6: il; dc i" sri. v. Raieshwar Rao, Advocate [oPtlcl e. one cc to sri. G"di'b?,1;;'ft;iilbLptliv'soti"it6r General of lndia toPUCl 10.Two CD CoPies TJ GJP N
HIGH COURT DATED:1 010412023 ORDER 1t\ ,(- vh ( rl- -) ) .. /- \." \ 11 ri[Y 2$23 ,.{ WP.No.20605 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. i\\ /'>- (\1 ) aB
