lrl/s. Srie Vedass lndustrres v. The Superintendent of Central Tax

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 [\/andamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction decla ring. (1)the action of the 1st Respondent in passing the Order-in-OriginalNo.53/2023- 24lGST/lVledchal, dated 1311212023 under Section 73 of IGST/CGST/SGST Act 2017 read with Section 50 of the IGSTiCGST/SGST Act 2017 read wrth Section 122 of the IGSTICGST/SGST Act 2017 read with Section 47 of the IGST/CGST/SGST r\ct 2017,for the tax periods 2017-18,2018-19 and 1i019-20, and thereby issuinq single Summary of Order in Form GST DRC-O z, dated 1911212023 for the lax period i.e.,20'1 7-2O18, comprises of tax, Penalty, late fee and lnterest of olht:r tax periods i.e.,2018-19 and 2019-2O in single (lrder in Form GST DRC-O7 dated 1911212023 without bifurcating tax, interest, late fee and penalty for the s;eparate 3 tax periods, as arbitrary, illegal, non-est in the eye (2) the action of the 1st respondent in uploading the summary of Order in Form GST DRC-07 daled 1911212023 without signature either physically or digyitally, is not valid in the eye of law (3) the action of the 1st respondent in not generating DIN in Forms GST l)RC-O7, dated 1911212023. i:; not valid in the eye of law and consequently set aside the Order-in-Original, d:rted 1311212023 and summary of Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 1911212023 p:rssed by the 1st Respondent, as null and void. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition unde' Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affrdavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be plr:ased to suspend the bank attachment notice issued in Form GST DRC-1tl dated 0410612025 under soction 79(1)(C) of GST Act,. by the 1st respondent tc the 4th respondent and also direct the 4th respondent to de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner. pendilrg disposal of the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 plerased to Suspend the Operation of the Order-in-Original, daled 1311212023 and summary of Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 19,12.2O23 issued by 1st respondent under the IGST/CGST/SGllT Act 2017,pending disposal of the above Writ petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KOHIR BHASKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No'1 to 3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' Sr. SG FOR CBIC Counsel for the Respondent No'5: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES The Court made the following: ORDER THE IION'B LE THE CHIEF JUS TICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGIT AND THID HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.2769 O of2o25 ORDER: Learned counsel Sri Kohir Bhaskar Reddy appears f<rr the petrtrone r. Sri D,lminic Fernar-rdes, learned Senior StandirLg Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Custonts (CBIC), appoars for respondents No' 1 to 3'

2. Tl-re r','rit petition has been preferred against the order-in-original datecl 13 '12 '2023 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Ta-x Act' 2017 (hereir-rafter referred to as, "the Act")' for the tax periods 2OI7 - 20 18, 20 18 2019 and 2olg - 2020 imposing the tax, penaltv and interest'

3. Thr: ':etitioner has approaci-red this Court alleglng that the proceedings have been conducted through a composite show cause notice covering different years' which is illegal and contra-q/ to the provisions of the lict' The petitioner asserts at paragraph 10 of the writ affidavit \l - 2 that its accountalt had never brought to its notice about the discrepancies occurred in the accounting and about any notices or orders issued by the department. The petitioner has come to know about the liability only upon the issuance of the garnishee notice in Form GST DRC 13 on 04.06.2025 for attachment of its Balk account (Annexure P.6).

4. However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order-in-original. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in apploaching the appellate authority and therefore, he may be directed to consider it sympatheticaliy.

5. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC has contested the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner on the composite show cause notice on the ground that if ,/ any of these charges relating to different tax periods covered by the show cause notice were '",zithin the timeline prescribed under Section 73 of the Act, the proceedings cannot be said to suffer from aly bar of limitation. The .,) petitioner has also not shown any prejudice for proceeding against it or-r the basis of the composite show cause notice considering three tax periods as it was within the timeiine' He submits tl'rat 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.

6. However, upon hearing the learned coun sel for th<l parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer all appeal, we c.o not wish to comment on the merits of th': contentions raised bY the Partles If the petitioner prefers an appeal within a period of 7 . two weeks rn ith statutory pre-deposit' the learned appellat'e authoritY w':uld consider it in accordance with law als;o keeping intrl consideration that the petitioner has bee 'n remedY before this Court in the pursuing the writ The petitioner will be at liberty to tal<e meantime as well. all the grounds in law and on facts before the aPPellate authoritY 4

8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty- However, there shall be no order as to COStS. Miscellaneous applications pending, if aly, shall starrd closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. A.JAYASREE ASSrsrANr RUISTRAR / SECTIOll/OFFICER The Suoerintendent of Central Tax, t\,4edchal GST Range, Medchal GST Oivision, Medchal GST Commissionerate, Secunderabad' The Superintendent of Central Tax, Circte-Vlll' Audit-ll, Commissionerate' Madhapur. Hitech CitY, HYerabad. The Chairman, Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, Ministry of iinini", O"prrtment of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 100 001. The Branch l\,4anager, Canara Bank, IVledchal Branch, PIt No 94, Chandra Nrgri Cofonv, tvlaii Road, Medchal, Ir4edchal-Malkajgiri Dist'' Telangana' The principal Secretary, Revenue (cT) Department, Telangana secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana- One CC to SRI KOHIR BHASKAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUCI One CC to SRI DOlVllNlC FERNANDES Sr. SC FOR CBIC [OPUC] TwoCCstoGPFORCOMIVERCIALTAXES,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana at HYderabad [OUT] Two CD CoPies To, 2 4 5 7 B o BSR TKS HIGH COURT DATED: 1610912025 ORDER WP.No.27690 of 2025 ;:-?=-i-\ ? :.1t ,],i, 2 0 0rT 2015 --:::=: -;.:_/ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS