Disposed

M/s.Oasis Poly Profile Private Limited v. The Joint Commissioner (St)

Telangana HC14 Feb 2025WP/4273/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions challenged suo motu revision proceedings under the CST Act, 1956 for tax periods 2015-16 and 2016-17, alleging the petitioner's jurisdictional objection was ignored. On consensus of counsel, the impugned orders were set aside and matters restored to the revisional authority for rehearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 02.11.2024 set aside; matters restored to revisional authority to rehear and pass fresh orders; no costs.

M/s.Oasis Poly Profile Private Limited Vs The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

t^3446I

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

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

¶6

WRIT PETITION NOS : 4273 AND 4279 OF 2o2s

¶7

W.P.NO: 4273 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s. _Oasis Poly Profile Private Limited,^plot No. 135, 2nd Floor, Oasis Tower X,. Prasantl'ri N.aggr,. .lDA Kukatpally, Hyderabad -SOO 072. .g{ate of Telangana, Rep. by its Managing Direct6r Mr.Ch.Sita Rama Raju

¶10

...PET|T|ONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. 2. The Assistant Commissioheilsi;, HyOernagar-1 Circte, HfOeranJO nurat Division Hyderabad.

¶13

The Appellate Joint Commissioner, (ST) Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad.

¶14

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

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or orders or Direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in passing suo Motu Revision Proceedings dated 02111t2024 served on the petitioner on0310112125, for the tax period 201i-16, under CST Act, 1956 without considering the objections of the petitioner dated 21t12t2023 filed on 2211212023, as arbitrary, contrary to law, without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law, and consequen y set aside the suo Motu Revision Proceedings of the Pt Respondent dated 02111t2024 served on the Petitioner on 031011202s for the tax period 201s-16 under the cST Act,i956 as null and void.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶18

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant Stay of all further Proceedings in pursuance of the Orders of the 2nd Respondent dated 05.1 1 .2024, served on the Petitioner on 03.01 .2025, for the tax period 201516 under the CST Act^'1856, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, Special Govt Pleader for State Tax

¶20

W.P.NO: 4279 OF 2025

¶21

Between:

¶22

M/s. Oasis Poly Profile Private Limited, PIot No. 135,2nd Floor, Oatib Tower lX, Prasanthi Nagar, IDA Kukatpally, Hyderabad 500 O72. State of Telangana.. Rep. by its Managing Director Mr.Ch.Sita Rama Raju

¶23

...PETITIONER

¶24

AND

¶25

The Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad.

¶26

The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Hydemagar 1 Circle, Hyderabad Rural Division Hyderabad.

¶27

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department' Hyderabad

¶28

...RE''.NDENTS

¶29

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 Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Orders or Direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in passing Suo Motu Revision Proceedings daled 02.11.2024 served on the Petitioner on 03.01.2025, for the tax period 2016-1 7, under CST Act, 1956 without considering the objections of the Petitioner dated 21 .12.2023 filed on 22.12.2023, as arbitrary, contrary to law, without^jurisdiction and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law, and consequently set aside the Suo Motu Revision Proceedings of the 1st Respondent daled 02.11 .2024 served on the Petitioner on 03.0'l .2025 for the tax period 2016-17 under the CST Act,1956 and also passed of revision order after limitation period prescribed under sub-section 32(3) of the T VAT Act,

¶30

2005 and the same is antedated to save limitations, hence the Proceedings of the 1st Respondent, as null and void.

¶31

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶32

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 grant Stay of all further Proceedings in pursuance of the Orders of the 2' Respondent dated 05.11.2024, served on the Petitioner on 03.01.2025, for the tax period 201617 under the CST Act 1956, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.

¶33

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, Speciat Govt Pteader for State Tax

¶34

¶35

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶36

¶37

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

¶38

WRIT PETITION Nos.4273 AND 4279 of 2o25

¶39

COMMON ORDER (Per th" Hon'ble ttrc Acting Chief Justice Sujog paul):

¶40

Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government pleader for State Tax, lor the respondents.

¶41

2 Regard being had to the similitude of the questions involved, these matters rvere analogously heard.

¶42

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties reached to a consensus. It is agreed that when the petitioner was put to pre-revision show cause notices, it filed reply and took a specific objection which reads thus:

¶43

"lt is further humbly submitted that against the Audit Assessment proceedings dated 30.04.2019, for the ta-x period December 2014 to J:urrre 2OlT under the TVAT Act, 2005 passed by the Assessing Authority was subject to Suo-Motu Revision by the then Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad vide proceedings dated 28.04.2023, on the same issue, we have filed T.A.No.31 of 2023 on the file of the Hon'ble VAT Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending adjudication. When the same issue pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Tribunal, there is a specific bar under Sub Se<;tion (5) of Section 32 of the TVAT Act, 2005 read u'ith Section 9(2) of the CST Act, 1956, which reads as foliows:

¶44

"it shall be lawful for the Commissioner to deler any proceeding under this Section by the reason of the Fact that an Appeal or other Proceeding is pending before the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court or the Supreme Court involving a question of law having a direct bearing on the Order or Proceeding in question."

¶45

¶46

It is agreed that this objection of the petitioner which^relatesto the jurisdiction/competent authority is not dealt^{with in the} impugned orders dated 02.11.2024 and therefore, the^{said order} may be set aside and the revisional authority may^{be directedto} rehear the petitioner and pass a fresh order by^{consideringthe} said objection in accordance with law.

¶47

4 In view of consensus arrived at, both the impugned orders dated 02.11.2024 are set aside. The matters^{are restored} in the file of revisional authority. The petitioner shall^appea-r before the revisional authority on 03.03.2025 at^{11:30 A.Mland} for this purpose, no fresh notice r,r.iil be required to be^issued. The revisional authority shal1 rehear the^petitioner and^pass fresh orders in accordance u,ith law.

¶48

Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the^{cases. No costs.}

¶49

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also

¶50

stand closed.

¶51

SD/.A.V.S. PRASAD ASSIS NT REGISTRAR

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

\ \

¶54

U SECTION OFFICER

¶55

To 1 The Joint Commissioner^{(ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad.} 2 The Assistant Commissioner^(ST), Hydernagar^{-1 Circle, Hyderabad Rural} Division Hvderabad.

¶56