M/S.Asrani Tubes Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St) Stu2

WP/12689/2023HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01023019202305 March 2025Bench: SUJOY PAUL,RENUKA YARA5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Asrani Tubes Limited, is challenging an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (ST) under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, dated February 13, 2023. The order, along with a summary in Form GST DRC-07, also dated February 13, 2023, pertains to the tax period April 2018 to March 2019. The impugned action disallowed Input Tax Credit (ITC) alleging it was invalid under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contends that these documents were passed without signatures or digital signatures, and the proceedings lacked a date, violating principles of natural justice and statutory provisions. The petitioner had filed detailed objections on December 16, 2021, and December 30, 2022, which they claim were not considered.

Held

The Court held that the impugned show cause notice and the order were unsigned documents. In light of the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.21101 of 2024 and batch, dated February 28, 2025, which addressed similar issues concerning unsigned orders, the Court found merit in the petitioner's contention. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned show cause notice and the order. The Court explicitly reserved liberty for the respondents to issue a fresh show cause notice and/or order in accordance with the law. It was further clarified that the limitation period would not be a hurdle for the respondents in undertaking this exercise afresh. The Court disposed of the writ petition without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, and the summary in Form GST DRC-07 are valid in law if they are not signed or digitally signed by the issuing authority? 2. Whether the proceedings, lacking a date and signature, are arbitrary, contrary to law, and in violation of the principles of natural justice? 3. Whether the disallowance of ITC under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, is sustainable when the petitioner's detailed objections were not considered? Contentions of the Petitioner: The petitioner argued that the impugned order and summary were unsigned, making them invalid. They further contended that the proceedings were arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violated the principles of natural justice and the rule of law due to the absence of signatures and dates. The petitioner relied on a common order passed by the High Court in WP.No.21101 of 2024 and batch, dated February 28, 2025, which dealt with similar issues of unsigned orders. Contentions of the Respondents: The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment, but their counsel appeared and participated in the hearing.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 16(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 3446 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION NO: 12689 AF 2023 Between: M/s.Asrani Tubes Limited , 102, 5-5-54 ' Hari Ganga IVlarket Ranigunj, Secunderabad. Rep. by its Dlreetor I\Ir.Sfyamlal A Asrani ...FETITIONER AND 1 2 The Deputy Commissioner (ST) STU2, Begumpet Division, Hyderabad' The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad. - t ...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 writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the aclion of the 1't Respondent in passing the Order under section 73, dated 13t02t2023 without signature or digital signature along with a Summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07, daled 131Q212029 without slgnature or digital signature and Proceedings of the 1st Respondent without date' without signature or digital signature for the tax period April' 20 18 to March' 2019' disailowing the ITC alleging invalid ITC under section 16(4)of the oGST Act, 2017 without considering the detailed objections filed by the Petitioner, dated 16112t2021 on 18t1212021 and 3011212022, passing the Proceedings by the 1"t Respondentasarbitrary,contrarytolaw,againsttotheprovisionsoftheCGST Act and sGST Act, 2017 , not valid in the eye of law, without jurisdiction and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law and consequently set 7 aside the Order passed Summary of the Or.Jer in Respondent as null ancl void under Section 73, dated 13t02t2)23 irlong with a Form GST DRC-07, dated 13t02t202,.\ of the 1st lA NO: 1 oF 2023 Petition under [jection 151 CpC praying that in the circumstan,:;es Stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Fugpend the operation of the Order passed by the .lst Respondent under Section 73, dated 1310212023 arong with surnmary of the order in Form GST DRC-07, dared 13/0212023 0f the 1st Respondent demanding the tar for tne, tax perioo April, 2p18lq MarQh, 2919 under the State Goodq s66 gervigg Tax Ar;t 2017 anq Central Goods and Servrce f ax Act2017. pending disposal "f tf,.aOqr"irit ' Gouns9|forlhePetitioner:SRlSHAlKJEELANlBAsH4 Ceunsel for the Respondents: SRt SWARqop OORILLA, SPECIAL GP FOR STATE TAX

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEI'JUSTICE SU.IOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUXA YARA WRIT PETITION No.12689 of 2023 ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paut)'. Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for the respondents.

With the consent, frnallY heard

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties fairly submit that the impugned show cause notice and the order are unsigned documents and therefore, in the light of the recent common order passed by this Court in W'P.No.21101 of 2024 and batch, dated 28.02.2025, ttle same may be set aside.

Accordingly, the impugned show cause notice and the order are set aside. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to issue fresh show cause notice/order in accordance with law and, II I I

2 for underta'king this exercise afresh, the rimitatio.:r w r not be a hurdle for r,he respondents. 5 The Writ Petition is disposed of without t:xpressing any opinion otr the merits of the case. No costs Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closel. ASEti //// SECTION OFFICER

The Deputy Commissioner (ST) STU2, Begumpet Divtsior', Hyderabad

The Principal Secretary, The State of Telangana' Revenue (CT) Department, Telangar-ra Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 One CC to Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, Advocate IOPUC]

Two CCs to Special GP for State Tax. High court for the :State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

Two CD CoPies V. KAVITHA ANT REGISTRAR I J \ To, TJ BSw

HIGH COURT DATED:0510312025 ORDER WP.No.12689 ot 2023 /.'7: ,':: , ./rJ1 I \ 04 APn 2C[ '1 it 4' * ,f oFsPATC sEo DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ffi;

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.