M/s. Venkateswara Granites Vs The Assistant… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

M/s. Venkateswara Granites Vs The Assistant… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without expressing any view on merits; impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2025 set aside; appellate authority to decide the petitioner's appeal in accordance with law ignoring the period the earlier writ petition remained pending, and not to dismiss the appeal on the ground of delay; petitioner undertakes to appear before the appellate authority on 16.04.2025 at 11:30 am with no further notice to be issued; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the present writ petition is maintainable even though the petitioner's earlier writ petition (W.P.No.9021 of 2022) was permitted to be withdrawn unconditionally on 24.12.2024, given the petitioner's letter dated 21.12.2024 seeking withdrawal with liberty. +1 more

Court's answer

Finding substance in the petitioner's argument (invoking Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation v. Anil Garg, (2017) 14 SCC 634), the Court entertained the writ petition as maintainable notwithstanding that the earlier writ petition had been permitted to be withdrawn unconditionally.

Ratio / Principle

In the peculiar facts of this case, since the petitioner had challenged the order-in-original within the statutory limitation period in W.P.No.9021 of 2022, which remained pending till its withdrawal, the appellate authority is directed to ignore the period during which the petitioner's earlier writ petition remained pending before this Court.

Key takeaways

The impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2025 is set aside.ratio¶40
The appellate authority is directed to decide the petitioner's appeal in accordance with law, and the appeal shall not be dismissed on the ground of delay.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara), W.P.No.6773 of 2025, M/s. Venkateswara Granites v. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and others, disposed of on 02.04.2025. The petitioner's appeal filed on 17.01.2025 against an order-in-original dated 31.01.2022 (u/s 74, CGST/TGST Acts, tax period July 2017 to March 2018) had been rejected by order-in-appeal No. HYD-GST-SC-AP2-733-2024-25-GST dated 31.01.2025 solely on the ground of delay. The petitioner had earlier pursued W.P.No.9021 of 2022 against the same order-in-original, which remained pending till it was permitted to be withdrawn on 24.12.2024 (a letter dated 21.12.2024 had sought withdrawal with liberty). Invoking Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation v. Anil Garg, (2017) 14 SCC 634, the petitioner argued maintainability; the Court found substance in the argument, held that in these peculiar facts the appellate authority should ignore the period the earlier writ petition remained pending before the Court, set aside the appellate order, and directed that the appeal be decided in accordance with law and not be dismissed for delay, the petitioner undertaking to appear before the appellate authority on 16.04.2025 at 11:30 am. Disposed of without expressing any view on merits; no costs.

[³⁴⁴⁶ I

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

WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE^SUJOYPAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA^YARA

WRIT PETITION NO:6773 OF 2025

Between:

M/s. Venkateswara Granites, Rep. by its Managing^{Partner Ravipati} Venkateswara Rao, 23-6-231, Hunter Road,^{Hanamkonda,Warangal- 506} o02.

..PETITIONER

AND

The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and^{GST, Circle-lV, Hyderabad} Audit-ll Commissionerate, 2-9-26817,^{Vikasnagar, Hanamkonda-506001,} Telangana.

The Dbputy Commissioner of Cenkal^{Taxe, WarangalGSTDivision, 2-7-391,} Sri Sai Nivis, Excise Colony, Hanamkonda-506001,^Telangana.

The Commissioner^(ln-situ)bf Central^{Tax andGST (Appeals-ll),O/othe} Commissioner of Cristoms and Central^{Tax,Appeals-ll, Hyderabad} Commissionerate, 7th Floor, GST^{Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Basheerbagh,} Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 o't the Constitution^{of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith,the High Court may be} pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other^{appropriate Writ,Orderor} Direction declaring the order-in-appeal^{No. HYD-GST-SC-AP2-733-2O24-25-GST,} dated 31 .01.2025,^passed by the 3rd^{respondent reiecting the appealfiled by the} Petitioner and the order in original^{dated 31 .01'2022passed by the 2nd} Respondent for the^period July,^{2017 to March,2018, as illegal, arbitrary,} highhanded and in violation of^{principlesof natural justice andconsequentlyset} the same and^pass such other^{order or orders may deemfit and proper in the} circumstances of the cdse. ln the alternative,^{The Hon'blecourt may be pleased to} l direct the 3rd respondent to^{disposeof the appealfiled by the petitioneron} 17.01.2025, aoainst thd order^{in original dated 31.0'l.2022, by condoning the delay} i

after setting aside the order in appeal dated 31 .01 .2025, pasr;ed by the 3rd Respondent.

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in_ the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to rtrd er-in-original passed u/s 74 o'f the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, daled 31 .01 .2022, passed by the 2nd Re:spondent under the provisions of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Central Goods and Services Tax Act, ItO.l7, for the tax period July, 2017 to March, 2018, pending disposal of the above W.it petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SINGAM SR|NIVASA RAO Gounsel for the Respondents: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, senior standing counsel for CBIC

The Court made the following: ORDER

7

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF^{JUSTICESUJOY PAUL} AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUI{A^YARA

IIIRIT PETITION No.6773 of 2o25

ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice^{Sujog Paul)}

Sri Singam Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel^{for the petitioner} and Sri Dominic Fernandes,^{learned Senior Standing Counsel for} CBIC, for the respondents.

This is the second visit of the^{petitioner to this Court.} Earlier, the petitioner filed^{W.P.No.9021of 2022, which was} withdrawn by it on 24.L2.2O24.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits^{that although in} the aforesaid order dated 24.12.2024^{it was mentioned that the} writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn^{unconditionally, it is} required to be seen that the^{petitionerfiled aletter dated} 21.12.2024 to withdraw the^{writ petitionwith a liberty. Thus, in} view of the^judgment of the^{SupremeCourt in HimachalPradesh}

Financial Corporation v.^{Anil Gargt, this writ petition is, indeed,} maintainable, despite^{the fact that the earlierwrit petitionwas} permitted to be withdrawn^{unconditionally.}

'(2017)^{14 scc634}

.- \

2

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitr; that the impugned ordr:r-in-original dated 31.O1.2022 was promptly challenged by the petitioner in the previous round of L tigation i.e., W.P.No.902ti of 2022, which remained pending with al interim protection till 2zr.12.2024 when it was permitted to be withdrawn. The petitioner d iligently assailed the order-in-original before this Court and efter withdrawal, filed al appeal which .:ame to be dismissed soleI.y on the ground of delay. In the pecuiiar facts of this case an d L y considering the fact that the time consumed before this Cour_ is condonable/ignorable, the appellale authoritv may be directed -o hear the matter on merits.

5 Learnecl Senior Standing Counsel for the respondr:nts raised formal objer:tion

We find substance in the argument of the learn,::d counsel for the petitioner..

7 In the peculiar lacts of this case, admittedly, the petitioner cha-llenged the crder-in-original within the period of statutory limitation in W.p. \o.902 1 of 2022, which remained pencting till its withdrawal

f*F--x

J

/

Thus, in^{the fitnessof things, we deem it proper to direct the} appellate^{authorityto ignore that period when the petitioner's} earlier^{writ petition remained pendingbeforethis Court'}

g. Resultantly,^{the impugnedappellateorder dated 3l'Ol'2025} is set^{aside. The appellateauthority is directed to decide the} appeal^{of the petitioner in accordance with law'However'the} appeal^{shall not be dismissedon the ground of delay' The} petitioner^{undertakesto appea'r beforethe appellateauthorityon} 16.04.2025^{at 11:30 am and no further notice for this purpose} shall^{be issued to the petitioner.The appellate authority shall} proceed^{in accordance with law from that stage'}

10.^{The writ} Petition 1S accordinglY^{disPosedofwithout} expressing^{any view on merits' No order as to costs}

Miscellaneous^{petitionspending,if any' shall stand closed'}

SD/-V.KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To

' The nuAit-tt Gommissionerate,^{Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and GST, Circle-lV,} 2-9-26817, Vikasnagar, Hanamkonda-506001,^{Hy^d^erabad} Telangana.

r irl". oLoutv Commissioner of^{Central Taxe, Warangal GST Division, 2'7 -391} ' - sri Sai irlivis, Excise Colony, Hanamkonda-506001 , Telangan?, ^ . .. s. ihe^{Commissioner(ln-situ)bf Central Tax an-dGST (Appeals-ll)' O/othe} "' Commissioner of Cdstoms'and Central Tax, Appeals-ll' {yder.alad. Commissionerate,^{7th Floor,GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Basheerbagh,} Hvderabad - 500 004, Telangana.

o;a cc^{to sRlSINGAMSRI-NIVASA RAO,AdvocateIoPUC]} S. One^{CCto SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' senior standing counsel tor Ctslu} toPUCI

6 Two CD Copies

PSK. p,r

LS

HIGH COURT

DATED:0210412025

ORDER

WP.No.6773 of 2025

.:. -
E s
O 3 )t,. <br>. ,+ ,\
i) , (l 'l
liJ
2 A P R tsfi i)
+
./
<br>

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

P+

lI \l' ,)