One CC to SRl v. VEERESHAIU

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 writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus (i) declaring Show cause notice no. 1712O23-24lGST-Adin dated 28.12.2023 and Form DRC 01 vide Ref no. DRC01-302948 dated 11.01 .2024 and impugned Order in Original No. 01/ 2O24-25-Adjn (GSTI supdt' dated 16.04.2024 and Form DRC-07 vide ref. no. 203605240068949 dated 03.05.2024, issued by the 1st Respondent under the provisions of CGST/TGST Act,2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and in violation of Articles t4, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and to consequently set aside any action taken pursuant thereto including recovery proceedings if any and pass such further or other orde(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and/or (ii) declare the Notification No. 79 of 2O2O dated 15.10.2020 issued by the Respondent No. 4 amending the Rule 142 (1A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as being without authority of law and ultra vires to the Section 73(5) of the Central Goods. and Services Tax Act 2017 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(9) and 21 of the Constitution of lndia as being without authority of law and ultra vires to the Section 73(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of lndia lA NO: 1 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 pleased to stay of operation of impugned Order in Original No. 01/ 202a-25-Adjn (GST) supdt. dated 16.04.2024 and Form DRC-07 vide ref. no. 2D36O5240068949 dated 03.05.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 1 undei CGST/TGST Acts, 2017 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship in the interest of justice. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 'l 5'l 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 recovery instructions/proceed ings vide DRC 13 dated 22.01 .2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2 to Respondent No. 5 and consequently allow the petitioner to operate their bank account Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. V. VEERESHAM Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1,2&4: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES (senior standing counsel for GBIC) Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO, DY. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.5: - The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COI'RT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE THE CHIEF .IIISTICE s;RI SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOIIII'DDIN WRIT Dated: O L.t2.20.25 Between: M/s. Sree Shirdi Sai Indane Service The Superintendent of Central Tax, Vanasthalipuram Range, Nagole Division, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate, and four others. ...Petitioner Respondents ORDER: Learned counsel Sri V.Veeresham appears for the petitioner / I 2 sri Dominic Fernandes, learned senior standing counsel for central Board of Indirect Taxes and customs, appea-rs fo:: respondents No.1 ,2 and 4. 2- The writ petition is preferred seeking the fo[owing relief: "F-or the above reasons, it is humbly prayed that the Honblc Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction nrore particularl5' one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus (i) declaring show cause notice No.IT /2023-24/GST- Adjn dated 28.12.2023 and Form DRC O1 vide Ref No.DRC0 l_302948 datcd I 1.01 .2024 and impugned Ordcr: in Original No.0112}24-25-Adjn (GST) supdt. dated 16.O4.2024 and Form DRC-07 vide re:f.no.ZD36O524OO6B949 dated 03.OS.2024, issued bi, the 1"t Respondent under the provisions of C3ST/TGST Act, 2017, as being void, arbitrar5r, illegal, without jurisdiction and in violation of Articles 14, l9(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India, and to consequently set aside any action taken pursuant thereto including recovery proceedings if any and pass such further or other order(s) as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; and/or (ii) declare the Notification No.79 of 2O2O dated 15.10.2020 issued by the Respondent No.4 anrending the Rule 142 (1A) of the Central Goods ar:d Services Tax Rules, 2OlT as being without J authority of law and ultra vires to the Section 73(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2Ol7 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(9) and' 21 of the Constitution of India as being without authority of law and ultra vires to the Section 73(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2OI7 and violative of Articles 14, 19(l)(g) and 2I of the Constitution of India; and pass such other order or orders as this court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition in order to approach the appellate authority. He submits that the petitioner has sufficient cause to explain the detay, if any, in preferring the appeal.

4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for respondents No.l, 2 and 4 submits that the order-in- original was uploaded on the portal. There is no reason \ why the appeai could not have been preferred within time. However, he submits that the appellate authority may be left to decide the appeal along with the delay condonation applicatiori in accordance with law. No observations on merits may be made I I 4

5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, if the petitioner is inclined to avail the remedy of appeal, we allow liberty to it to approach the appellate aut.hority with pre-deposit within a period of two weeks with a detay condonation application. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the question of dela-v to be taken in the application in accordance with lau' and if the appellate authority is satisfied with the delay, it may entertain the appeal on merits. However, \!.e have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if o,rr5l, shall stand closed. \ To, 1 2

3. SD/.M. OSMAN ALI BAIG SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER I I I i :l ,l I i l : ! t ; , ,f; .ii ;$ ! 1 :

4. Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing, New Delhi Rep by its Commissioner.

5. The [/anager, State Bank of lndia, Vanasthalipuram Branch Opp. Police Station, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad- 500070 6. One CC to SRl. V. VEERESHAIU, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to SRl. DOMINIC FERNANDES (senior st€rnding counsel for CBIC) 8. one cc to SRl. N. BHUJANGA RAo, DY. sollctroR GENERAL oF tNDtA [oPUC] IoPUCI

9. Two CD Copies B tM LS 6t Y+I- a t t HIGH COURT l \ DATED i0111212025 a. i :"'Jsl-,r'i\. \n.\ "/.. r\/' '\. i. .:) :i 10 rEr ffi ORDER WP.No.36306 of 2025 * t) Ir'' , DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I & cb tv