Allowed¶39

M/s. Prakjyothi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Telangana HC20 Jan 2025WP/119/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST Section 73 limitation breach; DRC-01 show cause notice dated 04.06.2024 beyond 30.05.2024 statutory limit (S.73(2)); final order due 31.08.2024 (S.73(10)) set aside; DRC-07 order 31.08.2024 FY 2019-20 vitiated; writ petition allowed without costs; Article 226 mandamus; M/s Prakjyothi Constructions Pvt. Ltd.; Assistant Commissioner (ST) Malakpet-II Circle; Telangana High Court; Sujoy Paul.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed: show cause notice dated 04.06.2024 and final order dated 31.08.2024 set aside; no costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stood closed. ¶39

M/s. Prakjyothi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs The… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed: show cause notice dated 04.06.2024 and final order dated 31.08.2024 set aside; no costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stood closed.

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the show-cause notice issued under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on 04.06.2024 exceeded the permissible time limits (SCN due on or before 30.05.2024 per S.73(2); final order due on or before 31.08.2024 per S.73(10)), thereby vitiating the notice and the consequent final order dated 31.08.2024.

¶34

Court's answer

The show-cause notice dated 04.06.2024 was issued beyond the permissible time of limitation (under Section 73(2) it could have been issued on or before 30.05.2024) and is therefore vitiated; the Special Government Pleader did not dispute the statutory deadlines of 31.08.2024 (S.73(10)) and 30.05.2024 (S.73(2)).

¶34

Ratio / Principle

Consequently, the entire proceedings and the final order founded upon the vitiated show-cause notice cannot sustain judicial scrutiny.

¶34

Key takeaways

Resultantly, both the show-cause notice dated 04.06.2024 (clause begun at para 37) and the final order dated 31.08.2024 are set aside.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana HC (Hyderabad), W.P. No. 119 of 2025, decided 20-01-2025 (order by Sujoy Paul J., bench incl. Dr. G. Radha Rani J.): M/s Prakjyothi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. challenged a Section 73 GST Act, 2017 assessment for FY 2019-20 (DRC-01 SCN and consequent DRC-07 order dated 31-08-2024 by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Malakpet-II Circle). The Special Government Pleader for State Tax conceded that under S.73(10) the final order was due on or before 31.08.2024 and under S.73(2) the SCN on or before 30.05.2024, whereas the SCN was admittedly issued on 04.06.2024. The Court held the SCN time-barred and vitiated, held that the entire proceedings and the final order founded upon it could not sustain judicial scrutiny, set aside both the SCN dated 04.06.2024 and the final order dated 31.08.2024, allowed the writ petition without costs, and closed pending miscellaneous petitions.

¶1

[³⁴³⁰ ]

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 119 OF 2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s. Prakjyothi .Constructions ,P!,t. Ltd., Having its office at l g-1 1 1 , Road No. 5, famalg^{Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana- s00065 Represented by its oirectoiriagnu} Ram Reddy Namireddy S/o. N Seetha Ram Reddy, Aged aSout 53 years, fl/o. Hyderabad.

¶11

.,...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

'1 . The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Malakpet-ll Circle, Channinar Division, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶14

Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, State of Telangana, C.T. Complex, Nampatly, Hyderabad- 500001.

¶15

State of Telangana, Bgp. 9y lts Principal Secretary (Revenue) Department, Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶16

a. U1!on of lndia, repres_ented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Secretariat, New Delhl.

¶17

.....RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 a writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring Notification s6l2o23-cr dated 2g-12-2023 issued by the Respondent No. 4 and the consequent G.o.Ms.No. 170 dated 30-12-2023 issued by the Respondent No. 3 as being void, illegal arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of Article t4 of constitution of lndia and Violative of Section 1684 of the

¶19

/CGST^{Rules,and also declare} the Show Cause Notice in Form No. DRC-01 bearing Ref No.2D36062401 14705 dated 31 -08-2024 uls. 73 and its consequent Order under Form No. DRC-07 bearing Reference No. 2D3608241538485 dated 31-08-2024 passed by the Respondent No.1 for the Financial year 2019-20 as being void, illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and non est in the eye of law and consequently set aside the same.

¶20

l.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶21

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 stay all further action including collection of tax pursuant to the show cause Notice in Form No. DRC-01 bearing Ref No.2D3606240114705 dated 31-08-2O24 uts.73 and its consequent Order under Form No. DRC-07 bearing Reference No. 2D36O824153848S dated 31-08-2024 passed by the Respondent No. 1 for the Financial yeat 2O1g-2O

¶22

Counsel for the Pelitioner : SRI M.NAGA DEEPAK

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEpUTy SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶25

The Court made the following ORDER

I t

I I

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND TTIE I{ONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADTIA RANI WRIT PETITION l\1o.119 of 2o25

¶30

ORDER: r Hon'ble Sri Jushce Sujoy Paul)

¶31

None appears for the petitioner.

¶32

¶33

Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government^Pleaderfor State Tax, appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 3. Heard.

¶34

Learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax did^not dispute that as per Section 73⁽¹⁰⁾ of the Goods and Services^Tax Act, 2017 (for short "the Act"), the Iinal order could have^been passed on or before 31.08.2024. As per the Section 73(2) of the Act, the show cause notice could have been issued on^or before 30.05.2024, whereas, in the instant case, the^show-cause notice IS 04.06.2024. admittedly, issued on In view of this fair admission by learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, it is clear that the show-cause^notice dated 04.06.2024 is issued beyond permissible time of limitation. Thus, the show-cause notice is vitiated. Consequently, the entire proceedings and fina-l order founded upon said show-cause notice .^{cannot sustainjudicialscrutiny.}

¶35

¶36

¶37