Dismissed¶34

Girijesh Kumar Chaudhary v. The Assistant Commissioner

Telangana HC3 Jan 2025WP/37158/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, 03.01.2025, WP No. 37158 of 2024, Girijesh Kumar Chaudhary v. Assistant Commissioner Jeedimetla-I, Union of India, State of Telangana, CBIC; GST matter involving CGST/TGST Act 2017, Section 73(10), Section 168A, DRC-07 order dated 27.04.2024, Notification No. 09/2023-C.T dated 31.03.2023, GO Ms. No. 118 dated 25.08.2023, Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265; dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to re-file, no costs; no merits ruling, no citation value on GST limitation.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file a properly constituted petition; dismissal without costs. ¶34

Girijesh Kumar Chaudhary Vs The Assistant Commissioner — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴³⁰ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR,THE STATE OF TELA,NGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 37158 OF 2024

¶7

I Between:

¶8

Girijesh Kumar Chaudhary, S/o. Ramdahin Chaudhary Aged about^5'1years, Occ. Business Rl"/o. Plot No. 3974, Subhash Nagar, lDA, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy, Telangana, lndia Financial Year. 2018-'19

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Assistant Commissioner, State/UT Jeedimetla-|, Hyderabad^{Rural, 2nd} Floor, Gagan Vihar, Nampally, Hyderabad Telangana

¶12

Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Represent by its Secretary^{North Block,} New Delhi-l 10 001 .

¶13

State of Telangana, Through Principal Secretary to Government^Revenue Department (Commercial Tax) Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶14

The Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing, New Delhi Rep by its Commissioner

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^{may be} pleased to

¶17

a) a writ, order, or direction more^particularly oneⁱⁿ the^{nature of a Writ of} Mandamus declaring impugned Order vide Ref No.^{2D360424O68085Cdated} 27.O4.2024 passed by the 1st Respondent under the^provisions of^CGST/TGST Acl, 2017 as being void, arbitrar!, illegal, without^{jurisdiction, violative} of^the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and to consequently set^{aside the sameand}

¶18

¶19

pass such further or other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶20

b) a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the Notification No. 09/2023-C.T dated 31.03.2023 issued by Respondent No.3 through Respondent No.4 and corresponding GO Ms. No. 118 dated 25.08.2023 issued by Respondent No.3, which extended the time limit for passing the orders, are without authority of law and ultra vires to the section 73(10) of the GST Act 2017 and Section 168A of GST Act, 2O17 and violative of articles 1a, 19(1Xg) 21 and 265 of the Constitution of lndia.

¶21

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶22

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 operation of Order vide Ref No. 2D360424068085C daled 27.04.2024 passed by Respondent No.^'1 in DRC-07.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 3: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI B.MUKHERJEE, REP. FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERIAL OF ]NDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, Sr. SC FOR CBIC

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRT .'USTICE SUJOY PAUL

¶27

AND

¶28

THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADIIA RANI

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.37158 of 2O24

¶30

ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J)

¶31

Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for respondent Nos. 1 and 3, Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.2 and Sri^Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC,^{for respondent} No.4

¶32

2 Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to^withdrawthis petition with the liberty to hle a properly constituted^petition

¶33

The other side has no objection

¶34

4 Accordingly, lhis Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for. No costs

¶35

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also^stand

¶36

¶37

SD/.T. TIRUMALA DEVI ASSIS T EGISTRAR

¶38