M/S. Sai Maanvi Developers vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Held
The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's contentions regarding the illegality of the order based on unsigned notices. Instead, acknowledging the petitioner's request to file an appeal, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority within two weeks. This liberty was granted with the condition of making the statutory pre-deposit and filing a delay condonation application. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider the delay condonation application sympathetically, taking into account the facts and circumstances, and if satisfied, proceed to decide the appeal on its merits. The Court explicitly stated that it did not wish to comment on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sai Maanvi Developers, filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court challenging an order dated 31.12.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, for the financial year 2023-24. The petitioner contended that they became aware of the tax liability only when the department contacted them for recovery. The impugned order was based on an unsigned DRC-07, which in turn was based on an unsigned DRC-01 dated 29.10.2024. The petitioner sought to declare the order illegal and unjustified and also sought a stay on further proceedings.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 31.12.2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, for the financial year 2023-24, is illegal and unjustified, considering it was based on unsigned notices (DRC-01 and DRC-07)? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that they only came to know about the tax liability when the department initiated recovery proceedings, implying a lack of proper communication or procedural irregularity in the issuance of the demand notices. They sought to have the order declared illegal. Revenue's argument: The respondents, represented by the Assistant Government Pleader and Special Government Pleader for State Tax, did not contest the merits of the petitioner's claim at this stage. Instead, they agreed to the petitioner's request to prefer an appeal against the impugned order.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[ 3518 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 32604 OF 2026 Between: lVl/s. Sai Maanvi Developers, rep. by its Proprietor, [\,4r. Dommata Venkata Madhava Reddy, S/o. D. Surendra Reddy, Aged. 45 Years, Occ. Business, #5-59/36, Samatha Nagar, Old Bowenpally, Hyderabad, Telangana - 506002. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Bowenpally - | Circle, Malkajgiri Division, Hyderabad.
The Deputy State Tax Officer, Bowenpally - I Circle, Malkajgiri Division, Hyderabad,
The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, (Revenue), Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Union of lndia, rep. by its Secretary, l\/inistry of Finance, Government of lndia, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Anicle 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 an appropriate W
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.