Dismissed¶68

M/s.Tara Agro Agencies v. The Appellate Joint Commissioner (St)

Telangana HC7 Apr 2025WP/1350/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tara Agro Agencies; High Court for the State of Telangana; W.P. Nos. 825 and 1350 of 2025; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to approach Department; SGST/CGST Act 2017 Section 168A; Section 73; G.O.Ms.No.118 dated 25.08.2023; Notification No.9/2023-Central Tax; GST DRC-07; ITC disallowance; limitation; tax period 2017-18; Appellate Tribunal not constituted; Article 226; Section 151 CPC; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Both writ petitions dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Department and, if occasion arises, to approach this Court again; no costs; pending interlocutory applications closed. ¶68

M/s.Tara Agro Agencies Vs The Appellate Joint… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁶ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NOs: 825 and 1350 of 2O25

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 825OF 2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s. Tara Agro Agencies , 6-4-74,1St Floor, Gandhi^{Road, Karimnagar- 505} 001. Rep.by its Proprietor Mr.Annam Manohar Rao

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST),^{HyderabadRuralDivision,} Hyderabad.

¶14

The Deputy Commissioner^(ST), Office of the Commissioner^{of StateTax,} Enforcement Wing, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Assistant Commissioner^(ST), Office^{of the Commissionerof StateTax,} Enforcement Wing, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶16

The Assistant Commissioner^(ST), Karimnagar-2^{Circle, Karimnagar.}

¶17

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its^{Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT)} Department, Telangana Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶18

The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary,^{Departmentof Revenue, Ministry of} Finance, New Delhi.

¶19

The Central Board of lndirect^{Taxes andCustoms,Rep. by its Chairman,} Ministry of Finance, Department^{of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat,} New Delhi - 100 001

¶20

..,RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under Article 226 of^{lhe constitutionof 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.

¶22

(1) G.O.Ms.No 118, dated 25.O8.2023 issued by the Government of Telangana and the Notificatiorr No.9/2023-Centra Tax, dated 30.06.2023 ssued by the 7th Respondent as^rrltra vires to Section 168A of the SGST/CGSIT Act 2017 and consequently sel aside the Penalty Appeal Order, dated 25.1".2024 passed by the 1St Respondent and the Order, dated 29.12.2023, the Sum'nary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 29.12.2023 and the Attachment to DRC-07, dated 29.12.2023 passed by the 2nd Respondent, levying Penalty, for the tax period 2017-18 underthe SGST/CGST Act2017, as null and void,

¶23

(2) Against the Penalty Appeal Order, dated 25.11.2024 (unsigned) passed by the 1st Respondent, though the second appeal lies before the Appellate Tribunal, but, however, the Appellate Tribunal has not been constituteJ yet, cannot be questioned, and

¶24

(3) the action of 1.he^'1 St Respondent in passing the Penalty Appeal Order, dated 25.'11.2024, merelv extracting the grounds of appeal and not evr:n discussing the same, while confirming the Penalty Appeal Order in a sr.rmmary manner, confirming the Order, dated 29.12.2023, the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 119.12.2023 and the Attachment to DRC-07, c)aIed 29.12.2023 passed by the 2nd Respondent, wherein the 2nd Respondent has disallowed the ITC under Section 73 of the SGST/CGST AcL2017, which is balred by limitation, without jurisdiction, arbitrary, bias, contrary to the Provisions ol' the Act and the same is in violaticn of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law and consequently set aside the Penalty Appeal Order, dated 25.'1 1 .2024 passed by the 1St Respondent and the Order, dated 29.12.2023, the Sumnrary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 29.12.2023 and the Attachment k> DRC-07, dated 29.12.2023 passed by the 2nd Respondent as null and void an(l not valid in the eyes of and Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circ;umstance of the CASC

¶25

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶26

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 suspend the operation of the Penalty Appeal Order, dated 25.11.2024 passed by

¶27

the 1st Respondent^{and the order,dated29.12.2023, the Summary of the order} in Form GST DRC-07, daled^{29.12.2023and the Attachmentto DRC-07, dated} 29.12.2023^{passed by the 2nd Respondent, for the tax period2017'18under the} SGST/CGST Act,^{pendingdisposal of the above writ Petition, as otherwise, the} Petitioner will be^{put to severe loss and hardship'}

¶28

Gounsel for the^{Petitioner:SRI MOHAMMEDRAFI' REP' FOR} SRI SHAIK JEELANI^BASHA

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.l to 5: SRI SWAROOPOORILLA,} SPL GP FOR STATE^TAX

¶30

Counsel for the^{Respondent No.6: SRI B.MUKHERJEE' REP' FOR} SRI GADI PRAVEEN^KUMAR' DEPUTY SOLICITOR^{GENERIAL OF INDIA}

¶31

Counsel for the^{Respondent No.7: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES'}

¶32

Sr. SC FOR CBIC

¶33

WRIT PETITI ON^{NO: 1350 0F 2025}

¶34

Between:

¶35

tVt/S. Tara Aqro Aqencies ,^{6-4-74, 1st Floor,Gandhi Road, Karimnagar- 505} rioi, nep. bf^{its Pioprietor Mr'Annam Manohar Rao}

¶36

...PETITIONER

¶37

AND

¶38

1 The Appellate^Joint Commissioner^{(ST), HyderabadRuralDivision,} Hyderabad.

¶39

2.TheAssistantCommissioner(ST),officeoftheCommissionerofStateTax, Enforcement Wing,^{Nampally,Hyderabacl'}

¶40

The Assistant^{Commissioner (ST), Karimnagar-2Circle' Karimnagar'}

¶41

The State of^{Telangana,Rep. by- its. Principal Secretary' Revenue (CT)} Department,^{Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad'}

¶42

The Union^{of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary,Ministryof Finance' North Block'} New Delhi-1'10 001.

¶43

The Central^{Boardof lndirectTaxes andCu.stoms'Rep' by its^Chairman'} " iliil"tt;] Fin-ance, oepiil.ent oiner.nue, North Block, central secretariat, New Delhi-100001.

¶44

...RESPONDENTS

¶45

Petition under^{Article226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavitfiledtherewith'the High Cou( may be}

¶46

pleased to issue^tA/rit of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction declaring.

¶47

(1) G.O.Ms.No.11U dated 25.O8.2023 issued by the Governm,-'nt of Telangana and the Notificatron No.9/2023-Centra^{Tax, dated31 .O3.2023issued by the 7th} Respondent as ultra vires to Section 168A of the SGST/CGST^{Act 2017 and} consequently set aside the Tax Appeal Order,^{dated25.11.20114passed by the} 1st Respondent^,anrl the Order, dated 26.06.2023,^{the Summaryof the Order in} Form GST DRC-07, dated 26.06.2023 and the Proceedings, dated 22.06.2023 passed by the 2rrd Respondent, levying tax, for the tax period 2017-18 under the SGST/CGST Act 2017, as null and void

¶48

(2) against the l'ax Appeal Order, dated 25.11.2024 (unsigned)^passed by the 1st Respondent, though the second appeal lies before the Appellate Tribunal, but, however, the Appellate Tribunal has not been constitute,l^yet, cannot be questioned and

¶49

(3) the action of tf,e 1st Respondent in passing the Tax Appeal Order, dated 25.11.2024, merelv extracting the^grounds of appeal and not evr:n discussing the same, while confirming the Tax Appeal Order in a summary manner, confirming the Order, dated 26 06.2023, the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 26.06.20213 and the Proceedings, dated 22.06.2023 pa'ssed by the 2nd Respondent, where n the 2nd Respondent has disallowed the ll-C under Section 73 of the SGST/CGST Act 2017, which is barred by lirnitation, without jurisdiction, arbitrary, bias, contrary to the Provisions of the Act and the same is in violation of Prirrciples of Natural Justice and Rule of Law and consequently set aside the Tax Appeal Order, dated 25.11 .2024^passed by the 1st Respondent and the Order, di:ted 26.06.2023. the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC07, dated 26.06.21023 and the Proceedings, dated 22.O6.2023^passed by the 2nd Respondent, as rrull and void and not valid in the eye of law.

¶50

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶51

PetitionunderSectionl5,lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the HighCourt maybe pleasedto} suspendtheoperationoftheTaxAppealOrder,dated2S'11'2024passedbythe 1st Respondent^{and the Order' dated 26 '06'2023} '^{the Summaryof the Order in} FoTmGSTDRC-07,dated26.06.2023andtheAttachmenttoDRC-07'dated 22.06.2023^{passedby the 2nQ Respondent, for the tax period 2017-18 under the} SGST/CGSTAct,pendingdisposaloftheaboveWritPetition,asotherwise,the Petitioner will be^{put to severe loss and hardship'}

¶52

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRI MOHAMMEDRAFI' REP' FOR} SRI SHAIK JEELANI^BASHA

¶53

Counsel for the^{Respondent No'1 to 4: SRI SWAROOPOORILI-A'} SPL GP FOR^STATETAX

¶54

counser for^{the Respondent No.5:} 3[l SIrY[H1[',=?=^i [5t|uf.:DEPUTY SOLICITOR^{GENERIAL OF INDIA}

¶55

Counsel for^{the Respondent No'6: SRIDOMINICFERNANDES'} Sr. SC FOR^CBIC

¶56

The Court^{madethe following:COMMON ORDER}

¶57

a<sup>(-

¶58

¶59

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

¶60

WRIT PE:TITIOi{ Nos.825 and 135O of 2025

¶61

COMMON ORDER (Per ttrc Hon'ble tlle Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul):

¶62

I \

¶63

Sri Moharnmed Ra-fi learned couns<:I represents

¶64

Sri Shaik .Ieelani Basha, learned counsel lor the petitioner; Sri Swarc,oJr Oorilla, learned Specia,l Government pleader for State Tax, for the respondent(s)-State Tax; Sri E,i. Mukherjee, learned corlnsel represenling Sri Gacli praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of Ind ia, for the respondent.(s)-Union of India and Sri Domini<: Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBltC, for the respondenl (s)-CBIC.

¶65

Learned counsel for the petitioner seekrs permission of this Cotrr-t to withdraw the writ petitions wr.th liberty to the petitioner to approach the Department anrl if occasion arises, to auproach this Court again.

¶66