DOMAKONDAMADHUSUDHAN v. The Deputy /Assistant Commissioner (ST), Begumpet Division' Bowenpally- ll
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by reserving
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Notification No.9 of 2023, dated 31.O3.2O23' This Court, today' pronounced a common order dealing with the validity of tJ:e said notification in W.P.No.2123 of 2024 and batch' Thus, no interference is required on said notification' So far other grounds on merits and otherwise are…
Judgment
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) [ 3430 J THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION NO:36972OF 2024 Between: DOMAKONDAMADHUSUDHAN,S/o.DOMAKONDARAJAIAH,Aged.about 5s'iilr',ibtc_ rji, iin"ss, nyo. rrit No. 45, Ground Floor, srikanth Nilayqm, ffi.'h;; Rffiy N;;;;-Bb*;pattv, nvoeratao, Telansana-Soo 011 Financial Yeat- 2019-20 ,.,PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy /Assistant Commissioner (ST), Begumpet Division' Bowenpally- ll ' Ciiir.,-'or'"ens Plaza, s.p. no"u' eqjump-et, Secundrabad' Hyderabad- 500003. 2- Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Represent'ed by its Secretary' North Block' New Delhi-1 10001
State of Telangana' Through Principal ggcr.etary to Government Revenue Department (Commercial Tax) Hyderabad, I elangana'
The Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing' New Delhi Rep bY its Commissioner ...RESPONDENTS 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. a) a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring impugned Order vide Ref No' 7:D36Cf,24143161K dated 30.OB.2024passedbythelstRespondentundertheprovisionsofCGSTffGST Acl,2OlTasbeingvoid, arbitrary, illegal, withoutjurisdiction'violativeofthe principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 1a 19(1)(g) and 265oftheConstitutionoflndia, andtoconsequentlysetasidethesame' b) a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the Notification No. 09/2023-C.T dated 31 .03.2023 issuedbyRespondentNo.3throughRespondentNo.4andcorrespondingGo Ms.
No. .t 18 dated 21i.o8.2023 issued by Respondent No. 3, which extended the time limit for passing the orders, are without authority of law and ultra vires to the section 73(10) of the GST Act 2017 and Section 1684 of GST Act, 2017 and violative of articles 1 4, 19(1 Xg) 21 and 265 of the constitution of lndia. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay operation of order vide Ref No. 2D360824143161K daled 3ologl2o24 passed by Respondent No. 1 in DRC-07. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR Counset for the Respondent No.1 & 3: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI B.MUKHERJEE' REP. FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERTAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, Sr.
SC FOR CBIC The Court made the following: ORDER I I 1 l. i t I I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AITD THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION No.36972 of2o24 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar, learned counsel for tfre petitioner; Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for respondent Nos.1 and 3; Sri B' Mukhe{ee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No'2 and Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, for respondent No.4. The principal ground of attack in this petition is to the
Operative part
Notification No.9 of 2023, dated 31.O3.2O23' This Court, today' pronounced a common order dealing with the validity of tJ:e said notification in W.P.No.2123 of 2024 and batch' Thus, no interference is required on said notification' So far other grounds on merits and otherwise are concerned, they can be raised in appeal. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by reserving
3. liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal' If the appeal is preferred within 15 clays from today, Iearned appellate authority shall entertain it on merits artcl shall not dismiss it on the ground 2 of delay. It is; made clear tleat this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ,TTRUE COPY// SD/. A.SRINIVASA REDDY REGISTRAR ASSI c o tr orRCen To, ,1i8,3",,gr"Li"J'F,el::Tfl nfl313:(3JJ;R??YIE:'"3":F"*.*ff13'Xy;Jl , 1::t::.,"'ary, Ministry of Finance' North Block' New Delhi Union of lndia- '1lilO*t**"::?$ru#":s',:",$?tLln?X?i'"Department(commerciar 4 The Commissioner' Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs' GST Policy " wfis:ii; il'D;rhi' 5. One CC to SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR' Advocate IOPUCI 6. One CC to SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' Sr' SC FOR CBIC IOPUCI ,3pi-"fi il,i[ls]Hi"m:E}51Yth3"',LTl,i?ii3[?5't'd'"^' SrArE rAX' Hish , H:*:3.i*:l s5l"'y+5335"3?,1"ht;,?!5,o3?,'o*
Two CD CoPies BSRw t I I I i ! i i I HIGH COURT DATED: 0210112025 ORDER WP.No.36972 ot 2024 .q)' 1il k wz. -) .) o t 10 rt! mzs ((\ t- ,-! ) * j ir :i' \\i=__;2, - ai- DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT GOSTS 1ecod4 &-.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by reserving
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.