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

Telangana HC21 Apr 2025WP/3784/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a GST show-cause notice under Section 73 for tax period 2020-21 was not pursued because the final adjudication order was passed during pendency; the petitioner withdrew the petition with liberty to challenge the fresh order in fresh proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to challenge the Order-In-Original dated 21.02.2025 in fresh proceedings; no costs.

M/s. Mangalya Shopping Mall Vs Assistant Commissioner… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD'} (SPeciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTY^{FIRST DAYOF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOYPAUL} AND THE HONOURABLE^{SMT JUSTICE RENUKAYARA}

¶6

WRIT PETITI^{ON NO: 3784oF 2025}

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. Mangalya Shopping^{Mall, rep. by its Partner'Mr-} .Kasam^{Mallikarjun'60} i;iii,^{l-t-ai l t4-l i, ftaniNasri,tia nuhakond a-506 00 1, warans al District'}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND.t. Assistant commissioner (state Tax), Ramgopalpet-Ranigunj-1 circle, BegumPet Division,^HYderabad.

¶11

Commissioner^{of Commercial Taxes, Telangana State'}

¶12

3.stateofTelangana,rep.byitsChiefsecretaryandSpecial.ChiefSecretaryto" c;;il'.";ItFncl, stlte fax Department, s6cretariat' Hvderabad'

¶13

Union of lndia,^{rep. by its Secretary'} Vili-t!ry^gf-^{Finance' JeevanDeep} eLjifOing, 3rd Fl6or,^{'saniadMarg' NewDelhi-'l10 001'}

¶14

.,.RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under^{Article226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstancesstat.edintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue a Writ^{of Prohibition or any other appropriate writ or order or} directionrestrainingthelStRespondentfromproceedingwiththeadjudication under the show^{cause noticedated29'11'2024 issued by the 1st Respondent} under Section-^{73 of the Central Goodsand ServicesTax Act' 2017 and the} Telangana Goods^{and Services Tax Act, 2O17for the tax period 2020-21on} accountofbeingwithoutjurisdiction,incontraventionofNotificationNo.l0of 2017 issued by^{the 3rd Respondent and also vitiatedby apparent bias and as} being barred^{by limitation and contrary to the scheme of the CGST Acl'2017'}

¶16

IA NO: 1 OF²⁰²⁵

¶17

Petition u r'ie r Section 1 5 1 cpc praying that in the c ir:u.nstances stated in the affidavit firecl rr support of the writ petition, the High cctrrt may be preased to grant interim s:a r of afi further proceedings pursuant to *re mpugned show cause notice dated i:g.11.2024 issued by the 1st Respondent fcr the tax period 2020-21 , pendin(r cJ :oosar of the writ petition as otherwise th(l t;,etitioner wifl be put to severe rosr; a r.l hardship.

¶18

Counsel for the [)et tioner: Ms. AKRUTI AGARWAL, REp. SRI KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Res :ondent No.1 to 3: SRI SWAROOP OORILI_A. SPL GP FOR STATE TAX

¶20

Counsel for the Res,rondents: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUry SOLICITOR GENERIAL OF INDIA

¶21

The Court made the 'ollowing: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HON,BLE THE ACTING^{CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL} AND

¶24

THE HON'BLE SMT^{JUSTICE RENUKA YARA}

¶25

WRIT PETITI ON^{No.3784 of 2O2S}

¶26

ORDER:^(Per the^{Hon'blethe ActingChief Justice Stloy Paul)}

¶27

Ms.Akruti Agarwal,^{learned counsel representingSri Karthik} Ramarra Puttamreddy,^{Iearned counsel for the petitioner ' and} Sri Swaroop Oorilla,^{learned Special Government Pleader for State} Tax, for the resPondents.

¶28

This petition assails^{the show-cause notice' But, during the} pendency of petition,^{the iinal order/Order-In-Original,dated} 2t.O2.2025, has^been Passed.

¶29

Lear-ned counsel^{for the petitioner prays for withdrawalof} this petition with the^{liberty tochallenge the fresh order} in appropriate^{fresh proceedings.}

¶30

The other side^{has no objection'}

¶31

Accordingly, this^{Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn'} with the liberty^{prayedfor. There shall be no order as to costs'}

¶32

¶33

Interlocutory glgligetio"q { fry nenlin^{g- shal,!-rstand closed.} SD/- L. VIJAYA LAXMI SISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRI KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMRE Y, Advocate [OPUC]

¶39

One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY^{SOLICITOR GENERIAL} OF lNDIA, High Court for the State of Telangana^{at Hyderabad} [OPUC]

¶40

Two CCs to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA,^{SPL GP FOR STATETAX'High} Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI

¶41

Two CD Copies BSR rt A LS (fi----

HIGH COURT

DATED:21rc4t2025

ORDER

WP.No.3784 ,rf 2025

.'f tt t: S T I t
k
((
o 2ri r,' L ',liitttt
I
-1 ).;:., p,,1r
.==-'

¶47

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION

¶48

AS WITHDRPWN,

¶49

WITHOUT CCISTS (+ TI,^f

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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. New Jaya Plywood Vs The Superintendent of Central Tax

Pittala Ravinder Vs The State of Telangana

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