High Court · 2025

r\r/s Srie Vedass lndustries O/o P19 i ri rui,"" *'-t' tr,,'t ed c h a I - tvt a t I a I g i r i' D If i; PH;T;il'r'tio isanti saraswathi ""; i",i LlSf ?:t ff 1 3?.%,T3 f 'A:'.;,J5?& ...PETITIONER AND l.TheAssistantCommissionerofCentralTax'tr'4edchalGSTDivision't\'4edchal GST Commrsstonerate Secunderabad' 2 The State of Telanqana' Rep by its Plf^cfal Secretary' gsvgnus (CT) ' o"'prii"!"t]i"i'ng"n; secretariat' Hvderaoao 3 rhe central Board of lndirect rq':t ?19^cl''lti["3i"3n"o.i'{"}it::ruH'?j}' ' tiiii.i* oilinance Department of Revenue t'tc rlew O'etfri - 100 001' 'il",fo?:'K,831n"533r1',il,';"0.il"*'i133:il'Iy"fl':::''.:'-'il:'?'i?li*3'?f Telangana "'RESP.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot Ihe 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 Direction declaring the action of the .1 st Respondent rn passing the order-in- dated 04'07 2024 under Section 73 of IGST/CGST/SGST Act 2017 read with Section 50 of the IGST/CGST/SGST Act 2017 read with Section 1122 of lhe IGST/CGST/SGST Act 2017 'for the tax periods 2021-2022 and 2022-23,and thereby issuing single Summary of order in Form GST DRC-o7' dated 05 07 2024 for the tax period i'e ' 2021-22' comprises Original No 58/2024-25lGST/lvledchal' of tax. penalty an(l lnterest of other tax Form GST DRrl-0Z,dated 05.O7.2024 penalty for the sep,lrate 2 tax periods, as law and contrary to the provisions of the of the l st respondent in uploading the dated 05.07.2024. without stgna ture eye of law the actio n of the DRC-07.dared Ot.0..2024. aside the Order_in-Original, period i.e., 2022-23 in singte Order in without bifurcating tax, interest, and arbitrary, illegal. non_est in the eye of IGST/CGST/SGST Act 201l the action summary of Order in Form GST DRC-02 either physically or digitally, is not valid in the not generating DIN in Forms GST eye of law and consequenfly set and summary of Order in Form cST DRC-O2 daterd r)5.07.2024 passed by the '1 st Respondent, as null and void IA NO: 10 F 202s 1st respondent in is not valid in the dated 04.07.2024 Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i. support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the ban< ?ttachment notice issued in Form GST DRC_ j3 dated 04.06.2025 under section re spo nd enr a nd a s;o,,".1:J:'t:l H:L::l,::L::j j:::TH::::: lI the petitioner, pendrnc disposal of the writ petition. IA NO: 2 oF 202s petition under Sier 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated "ffiJ ;:i:: ::::: : j:il:,J.# ;:; :: J,",ffii :; in the affidavit filed in su S u spend the ope ra,o r of order in Form GST DRC-.7 dated 05.07.2024 issued by .lst the IGST/CGST/SGSIT Act 2017, pending disposat of the above Writ petitron Counsel for the petirioner: SRI KOHIR BHASKAR REDDY Counsel for the Resporrdent No.1 & 3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, Sr. COUNSEL FOR CBrc- Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Gp FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES The Court made the follcwing: ORDER respondent under , THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGI{ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHruDDIN AND WRIT PETITION No.27627 of 2025 ORDER: Learned counsel Sri Kohir Bhaskar Reddy appears for the petitioner. Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appears for respondents No.1 and 3

2. The writ petition has been preferred against the order-in original dated 04.07.2024 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Ta-r Act, 20 17 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act"), for the tax periods 2O2l - 2022 and 2022 - 2023 imposing the ta-x, penalty and interest.

3. The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that the proceedings have been conducted through a composite show cause notice covering different years, which is illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Act. The petitioner has asserted at paragraph 5 of the rvrit ,- affidavit that neither the sho.,v cause notice nor the notice of personal lrearing u.as serve<i or uploaded in the GST portal. Thr: petitioner has come to knou, about the liability only upon the issuance of the garnishee notice in Form GST DRC- 13 on 04.06.2025 for attachment ol- its Bank account (Ar nt.xure p.6).

4. Learnr:d counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal pref,:rred by thc petitioner on 16.O6.2025 against the order-in-original rvas withdrawn on erroneous advice of the fellon, a3countants, as the petitioner was advised that thc appeal carnot be filed against a single order ernd single GST DRC-07 issued for multiple tax periods u.here two years ta-x cannot be bifurcated.

5. Hou,ever, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to once again prcfer al apperrl against the order_in_original. He submits that some delav might have been occuri:ed in approaching the appellate authority and therefore, he may be directed to consider it sym oatheticalll.. BSR IVIVT

6. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC has contestedthesubmissionsmadeonbehalfofthepetitioner on the composite show cause notice on the ground that if any of these charges reiating to different tax periods covered by the show cause notice were within the timeline prescribed under SectiorL 73 of the Act, the proceedings cannot be said to suffer from any bar of limitation The petitioner has also not shown any prejudice for proceeding against it on the basis of the composite show cause notice considering two tax periods as it was within the timeline' He submits that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the composite order-in-original and DRC-07 taking all the grounds as are available in law and on facts before the appellate authority in respect of any particular tax period. 7 However, upon hearing the . learned counsel for the parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer an appeal, w,e do not wish to comment on the merits of the contentions raised bY the Parties -

8. If thc p,:titioner prefers an appeal rvithir-r a period of two weeks vi.ith statutory pre-deposit, the learneci appellate authorit)' u ol.ld consider it in accordance u,ith larn also keeping into r:onsideration that the petitioner has earlier erronecusly q'ithdrawn its appcal against the impugned order-in-origir-. a1 and has been pursuing the w,rit remedy before this (lourt in the meantime as well. The petitioner will be at liberty to take all the grounds in law and on facts before the aopellate authority-

9. The rrvnt petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liber ty. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscel Ianeous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. C. DEEPIKA ISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER \.\ 1 ! The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax. Ir,4edch GST Comm issio nerate, Secunderabad. \..1 al GST Division, IVedchal

2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad. St rte of Telangana.

3. The chairnran. central Board of lndirect raxes and customs, Ministrv of Fin^ance. Department of Revenue. Nodh Brock, centrai secieiai"t, lJ"ri ri.=rii - '100 001 .

4. The Branch lVanaoer Canara Bank, A,4edchal Branch, pit No.94, Chandra Nagar colonv. Ir/airi Road. rr,leocrrir rvreocrrai-rrrra-rr,alsiri oist.. rlianlana. "'"

5. One CC to SjRt KOHTR BHASKAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl 6. One CC to SRI DOIV|NIC FERNANDES. Sr. COUNSEL FOR CBIC tOpUCl 7. Two ccs t. c;P FoR cgrvrl\/ERCTAL TAXES, High court for the State of Telangana at l- yderabad [OUT] B. Two CD Copiel; BSR IVIVT HIGH COURT DATED: 1610912025 ) ORDER WP.No.27627 of 2025 :=- ;7;s,'U.'\ tl L: c (\ 29EtIP5 z o .t'', /)^' .Sl'1r,'.--' t\:-== -_:- ' -j DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS J