Disposed

M/s. Coppertaurus Technologies (India) Private Limited v. The Appellate Joint Commissioner(St)

Telangana HC6 Feb 2025WP/3225/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed Writ Petition for GST appeal rejection consensus arrived parties agreeing dispose order passed Writ Petition 3600 of 2024 petitioner directed deposit 100% tax liability approach Tribunal within three months no coercive action pending Tribunal decision.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to deposit 100% of tax liability within four weeks; approach Tribunal within three months; no coercive action till Tribunal decision.

M/s. Coppertaurus Technologies (India) Private… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

13446 |

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD . (Special Original Jurisdictibn)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE.THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY^PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA^YARA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 3225 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s. Coppertaurus Technologies^{(lndia)P1ivate Limited,PlotNo.137145,} Madhapui, Patrika Nagar, Hyderabad,^{Telangan-500081, Rep. by its} Managing Director, Revathy Vinnakota.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The Appeltate Joint Commissioner^(ST), Hyderabad^{Rural Division,} Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The Assistant Commissioner^(ST), Madhapur^{- lll, Hyderabad Rural} Hyderabad.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article²²⁶ of^{lhe Constitutionof lndia prufri tf,rt in tf,"} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiled therewith,the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue Writ of [Vandamus or any other appropriate^Writ or^{Order or} Direction declaring the action^{of the 1st Respondent in rejecting the appeal order} dated 24t1012o24 the same uploaded^{in the GST portal without eitherphysically} nor digitally signed which^{is contrary in Rule26 (3) of the CGST Rules2017} '^the appeal filed by the Petitioner^{under Section107 of the Act, as the 1st Respondent} has no power to condone the delay^{beyondfour months, and the Summaryof the} Order in FORM GST DRC-07^{of the 2nd Respondent,daled 2310512023 passed} for the tax period April, 20'19 to March,2020^{uploaded in the GST portal without} either physically nor digitally signed^{whichis contrary in Rule 26 (3) of the CGST}

¶19

Rules 2017' as rerl:r,v unenforceabre and non-est in the eye of raw and set_aside the same, and as ittegat arbitrary arinitio voio co-ntirry ,o tn" prorrisions of GGST Act and Rures 20.r r'under_the centrar cil;;;''s""rvice Tax At>t 2017 and the State Goods and {lc,rvice I* A:, zoiz, ,rlrOiir"i,'contrary to tire provisions of the CGST/SGST A3t 2017, and without "ren'isrling Form GST DRC_01A as contemplated under Rure 142 (1A) of Rurei z6ii, wi*rout jurisdiction and in violation of Princit,leis of Natural Lr'.ti"" ,nJ "*iuq Rejection p-.".ii. g. ;r'ir,. r .t Respondent, d;il ;?71'J,#f ll5;i["l,lt"^1 GST Portat and sunr-mary of the ordei Jri"o zi6i7o23 of the 2nd Respondent.

¶20

lA NO: 1 oF 2025

¶21

Petition under section 1 51. cpc praying that in the.circumst;a nces stated in the affidavit fired in support of the peiitio;, ir'" iign court may be preased to suspend the operati.n of the Summary of th; o;de;, d ated 2310512023 passed by the 2nd Respondent for the tax. perioJ npiit'iO/S to March, 2C20 under the centrar Goods and liervice Tax Act ioir'{ri'ti. s'tate Goods and Service Tax 4ct2017, pending riisposar of the above w;i p;iil"; as otherwise, the petitioner will be put to severe: loss and hardship.

¶22

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR

¶23

counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: sRr swARoop ooRrLLA,

¶24

SPL GOVT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX

¶25

counsel for the Respondent No.4: sRr B. MUKHERJEE REp. FoR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. soLtctroR GENERAL cir truorn

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent No.S: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES.

¶27

SR. SC FOR CBIC

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

¶30

THE HON'BLE THE^{ACTING CHIEFJUSTICE SUJOY PAUL} AND THE HON'BLE SMT.^{JUSTICE RENUKAYARA}

¶31

UIRIT PETITION No.3225 of 2o25

¶32

ORDER (Per the Hon'ble^{the Ading Chief Justice Suioy Paul):}

¶33

Sri M. Venkatram Reddy,^{Iearned counsel for the} petitioner; Sri Swaroop Oorilla,^{Iearned SpecialGovernment} Pleader for State Tax, for^{respondentNos.1 to 3;} 'l^{Sri B.} ' Mukherjee, learned counsel^{representingSriGadi Praveen} Kumar, learned Deputy^{SolicitorGeneralof India, for respondent} No.4 and Sri Dominic^{Fernaldes, learned Senior Standing} Counsel for CBIC, for^{respondent No.5.}

¶34

During the course of^{hearing, learned counsel for the} parties reached to a consensus. .It^{is agreed that this petition} may be disposed of in^{terms of order passedin W'P'No'3600of} 2024.

¶35

Accordingly, as agreed,^{the Writ Petitionis disposed of,} by directing the^{petitioner to deposit lOo/o of the ta4,'liabilityas} assessed by the^{Assessing Officer and deposit the same with the} Department within^{four weeksfrom today' The petitioner shall} approach the Tribunal^{within three months from the date of its} constitution/establishment.^{The Tribunal shall decide the} second. appeal in^{aci:ord.ance with law'Further, subjectto} depositing lOo/o of^{the tax liabilitywithinaforesaid time' no}

¶36

¶37

i I I

¶38

coercive action be taken against the petitioner till the decision of the Tribunal in the second appeal. It is made clezrr that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits ,tf the case. No costs.

¶39

¶40

InterJocutory applications, if any pending, shail also

¶41

stand closed.

¶42

To,

¶43

SD/. K. AMMAJI SI 1TANT^REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \i;;ON OFFICER

¶44

1 The Appellate Joint Commissione(ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad.

¶45

2 The Assistant Commissioner (ST), It/adhapur - lll, Hyderabad Rural. Hyderabad.

¶46

3 The Princical Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, The St:rte of Telangana, Telangana liecretariat, Hyderabad.

¶47

4 The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, The Union of lndia, North Block, New Delhi - 1^'10 001 .

¶48

The Chairrnan, IVinistry of Finance, The Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, Department of Revenue. North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 100 001 .

¶49

t) One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, (Deputy Solicitor General of lndia), High Courl. for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OPUC]

¶50

7 One CC to SRI VENKATRAIV REDDY MANTUR, Advocate^.OPUCI 8I One CC to SiRl DOMINIC FERNANDES, SR. SC for CBIC IOPUC] Two CCs to Sri SWAROOP OORILLA, Spl Govt Pleader For State Tax, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶51

'10.Two CD Ccpies

BN GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0610212025

ORDER

WP.No.3225 of 20252025

¶58

WP.No.3225 of 20252025 /.aa:=r =
-/,-. ::. I. ,,4-
u
t,'-- v
! 1 li[r, tt:il
i_1
l , :1r
oEs,. -;."

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

M/s. Coppertaurus Technologies (India) Private Limited v. The Appellate Joint Commissioner(St)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Coppertaurus Technologies (India) Private Limited v. The Appellate Joint Commissioner(St)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Yadagiri Vs The Regional Director

Sri Narayana Sambarapu Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Iris Meditech Vs The State of Telangana

M. Lakshmi Chaithanya Vs The State of Telangana

Gouru Venkateshwarlu Vs Gouru Ramesh

Pittala Naresh Vs The State of Telangana