Disposed

M/s. New Jaya Plywood v. The Superintendent of Central Tax

Telangana HC21 Apr 2025WP/10474/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST taxpayer challenged unsigned DRC-01 and DRC-07 notices and bank attachment. The court allowed it to pursue statutory appeal; if appeal and pre-deposit are filed within three weeks, the Appellate Authority must decide on merits ignoring delay.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to file appeal with pre-deposit within three weeks; appellate authority to decide on merits notwithstanding delay; no costs.

M/s. New Jaya Plywood Vs The Superintendent of… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENry FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTTCE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10474 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

IVI/s. New Jaya Plywood, Having address at 4-3-611113 and 4, Bhukatapur, Beside Aryabhatta School, Adilabad, Telangana- 504001, Represented^{by its} Froprietor, Mr. Makadia Ashwin Kumar, aged about 62^years, 4-1-76, Kumat Pet, Adilabad, Telangana- 504 001

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Superintendent of Central Tax, H. No.6-10-861811 , 2nd^{Floor, Bhukatapur,} Adilabad- 504001

¶12

2 Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Represented by its Secretary,^{North Block,} New Delhi-1 10 001

¶13

Union Bank, (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Represented by^{its Manager,GMR} Towers, Cinema Road, Adilabad

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia^{praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court maybe} pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of^a Writ of Mandamus

¶16

(i) declaring un signed Show cause notice in Form DRC^{01 vide Refno.} DRCo1_254542 dated 19j2.2023 and an unsigned^impugned Summary Order in DRC-07 vide ref. no.2D36032401531 70^dated 12.03.2024 both issued by the 1st Respondent under the^{provisions of} CGST/TGST Act, 2017 as being void, arbitrary,^{illegal, without} jurisdiction and Articles I a, 19(1 Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and to consequently set aside any action taken^{pursuant thereto}

¶17

¶18

and pass riuch further or other order(s) as this Hon'ble^(;ourt may deem fit and prop:r in the circumstances of the case.

¶19

( ii) declare thr: Form DRC 13 dated 06.02.2025 issued by l:{espondent No. 1 as withc r.rt authority of law and violative of articles ' a, 19(1)(9), 21 and 265 cf the Constitution of lndia and consequentl I set aside the same

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circun rstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High Cour{ ma,, be pleased to stay operation of F,rrm DRC 13 dated 06.02.2025 issued by tre Respondent No.1 to Respondent l\o.3 and consequently allow the petitioner o operate their bank account.

¶22

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circun,stances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High Court ma) be pleased to stay of operation of an unsigned impugned Summary Order in Dl:lC-O7 vide ref. no.2D3603240'1 53170 dated^'12.03.2024 issued by the Respondr,nt No. 1 under CGST/TGST Acts, i:0 17 pending disposal of the above Wr t petition, as otherwise, the Petiticr er will be put to severe loss and hardship.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.UMASHANKAR, REp. FOR SRI V.VEERESHAM

¶25

Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES,

¶26

Sr. SC FOR CBIC

¶27

Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: SRI G.NARESH, REp. FOR SRI A.KRANTI KUMAR REDD/

¶28

The Court made the lollowing: ORDER

¶29

¶30

w :.1 ../

¶31

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

¶32

AND

¶33

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE RENUI{A YARA

¶34

UIRIT PETITION No.1O474 of 2O2S

¶35

ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Poul)

¶36

Sri M.Umashankar, iearned counsel representing Sri V.Veeresham, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, for respondent No.1 and Sri G.Naresh, learned counsel representing Sri A.Kranthi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶37

With the consent finally heard.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to avail the statutory alternative remedy against the Order-in Original,

¶39

¶40

dated 12.03.2024, (O.I.O.), which came to his notice when bank attachment had taken place and he enquired about the matter. Before that O.I.O appears to have been served on an employee who was already terminated by the petitioner. The petitioner is ready to avail the remedy of appeal ard he is a_lso ready to fulfill the requirement of pre-deposit. His appeal may be directed to be decided on merits. ,l

His prayer s; formally opposed by learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC,

¶45

We have he:r.d the parties.

¶46

The petition,:r has prayed for innocuous relief of av riling the alternative remed y and also willing to fulfill the requir :ment of pre-deposit.

¶47

7 . Considering l.he aforesaid, we deem it proper to permit the petitioner to a.r,ai1 the said remedy. If the petitione:r pr.efers an appeal a,d fulfill; the requirement of pre_deppsit u,itl in three weeks from todal-. the Appellate Authority shaIl con s der and decide it on merits and it sha11 not be throu,n overboar,l on the ground of delay

¶48

B. Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of, without expressing any op ,ion on the merits of the case. There shall be no order as to cost';,

¶49

Interlocutory zLpplications, il any pending, sha1l stanrl closed

¶50

ro,

¶51

SD/.A. SRINIVASA REDDY //TRUE COPY//^{ASTISTANI REGISTRAR} \^r )^{'lSECIION OFFICER}

¶52

, H:,r.r:f tt.";;]?nt of Centrar Tax, H. No.6-10 -aat|n,2no Ftoc r, Bhukatapur, t

¶53

1. The Secretarv. r/inistry of Finance, North Block, New Derhi, Uni,:n of rndia110 001

¶54

The Manager, Urion Bank, (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) GMR .fowe,rs, Cinema Road, Adilabad

¶55

One CC to SRt / VEERESHAM, Advocate tOpUCI

¶56

One CC to SRt t\ KRANTT KUMAR REDDY, Advocate tOptJCl

¶57

rl -lt - '-?. .':)7? *d

¶58

One CC to SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, Sr.^{SC FORCBIC} IOPUC]

¶59

Two CD Copies BSR LS w

I ,

I i I I i i

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 10412025

I !

ORDER

o( 'IEL4
\d j7,
v
C) t.-.,&
a
C
-<br>-\--c
ral
<br>a.-

¶69

WP.No.1 0 47 4 ol 2Oi$,11',,.,* *

¶70

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS

¶71

a1 lq 1atr

M/s. New Jaya Plywood v. The Superintendent of Central Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. New Jaya Plywood v. The Superintendent of Central Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangam Janardhan Goud, Vs M/s. Vasudeva Realtors Pvt. Ltd.

Garugu Raju Vs The State of Telangana

M/s.Bajaj Electricals Limited, Vs The Deputy Commissioner (St) STU-1

M/s. Mangalya Shopping Mall Vs Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)

Pittala Ravinder Vs The State of Telangana

M/s.Gee Kay Steel Corporation Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)