M/s. Vigilant Facilities Management V. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Mehdipatnam GST Division, Hyderabad and Superintendent of Central Tax, Shivrampally GST Range, Mehdipatnam GST Division, Hyderabad and State Bank of India, Industrial Estate Area, Kattedan, Hyderabad

WP/19833/2023

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Vigilant Facilities Management, which filed a writ petition against an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Mehdipatnam GST Division, Hyderabad. The writ petition challenged the Order-in-Original No. 10/2021 (Central Excise) dated 30.11.2021, claiming it was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and various articles of the Constitution of India. The petitioner argued that the order was not served, leading to an unintentional delay in filing the writ petition until 28.06.2023, after their bank account was attached under the said order. The court, however, found the delay significant and noted the availability of an alternative remedy through an appeal under the Finance Act, 1994.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 691996 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Finance Act 1994, Exemption Notification 25/2012 Service Tax
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B SAPNA REDDY; DOMINIC FERNANDEZ
• Assessee Lawyers: M NAGA DEEPAK
• Keywords: Appeal; Condonation of delay; Impugned order; Jurisdiction; Natural Justice; Statutory remedy; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 14; 85; 265; 19(1)(g)

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 19833 OF 2o23 I337s l ...PETIT]ONER Between: AND 1. M/s. Vlgilant Facilities Management, H M.6 -5 -195/31, Markandeya Nagar, Katteia.n, Hyderabad Repretented by its proprietor tr/r. Aonakurthi Ri\"mu, S/o. B. Laxmaiah, Aged about 34 YearS Re/d. Hyderabad 2 3 Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Mehdipatnam GST Division Hyderabad Commissionerate H.No.10- 3- 3O1-'303, 2tu Floor, Serene Heights-, Humayunnagar, Masab Tank, Hyderabad -5O0O2g Superintendent of Central Tax, Shivrampally GST Range, Mehdipatnam GST Division, Hyderabad GST Commissioneiate H.No.1O- 5-3Ol -303,2.d Floor, Serene Heights, Humayunnagar, Masab Tank, Hyderabad -5OOO2g State Bank of lndia, lndustrial Estate Area, Kattedan, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500077 ...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 pass a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned order in original No. 1Ot2O21 (Central Excise) dated 3O/1 il2OZt passeO by Respondent No. .l as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principtes of natural iustice, without jurisdiction and set aside the same as being contrary to Exemption Notification 2Sl2O12 Service Tax dated 201612012 issued under Finance Act 1994 and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) and 265 of Constitution of lndia and pass such further orders in the interest of justice lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the attachment retter dated 2310212023 issued to the Respondent No. 3. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay the demand of tax, penarty and interest revied by impugned order in originar No. 1012021 (Central Excise) dated 3Ot1112021 passed by Respondent No. .l . Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. NAGA DEEPAK Counsel for the Respondent No.1: M/S. B. SAPNA REDDY, SC FOR INCOME TAX counsel for the Respondent No.2: M/s DoMrNrc FERNANDEZ, sc FoR cBlc Counsel for the Respondent No.3:-- The Court made the foltowing: ORDER a) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAJYIJI W.P. No. 19833 of2O23 ORDER:(per lIo n'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHE) ' Heard Mr.M.Naga Deepak, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mrs. B.Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for respondent No.1; Mr.Dominic Fernandez, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC appearing for respondent No.2 and perused the entire record. 2. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the Order-in- Original No.lO/2O21 (Central Excise) dated 30. 11.2O21 passed by respondent No. 1. 3. The impugned order is one that has been passed on 30.11.2021 and the instant writ petition is one which has been filed only on 28.06.2023 i.e., almost after one and half year. 4. The only ground raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner to justiff the4lelay that has occurred in *re liling of the writ petition is that subsequent to the respondents initiating attachment proceedings and the bank,.account of the petitioner getting attached utde order dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P4), they came to know about the impugned ord6r andl thereafter, they have got a copy from the office and have preferred the instant writ petition. z 5. Considering the fact that there is an abnormal delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching the writ court that too in a manner where there is a statutory remedy of an appeal provided under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, this Bench in exercise of its writ jurisdiction finds it difficutt to entertain the writ petition as it would be appreciation of the factual aspects which under the writ jurisdiction would not be permissible, particulariy' when there is a statutory remedy of an appeal being available to the petitioner' 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture submits that if the petitioner is permitted to approach the Appellate Authority to avail the remedy of an appeal, the petitioner may not have any difficulty. However, since there is arr inordinate delay from the teeth of Order-in-Original and frling of the writ pctition' there is an apprehension that the Appellate Authority may not entertain the appeal on its merits. 7. Be that as it may, since we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition on the ground of there being available an alternative remedy of appeal, we permit the petitioner to prefer an appeal assailing the impugned order dated 3}.ll.2o2l ' However, when the petitioner frles an application for condonation of delay explaining the delay occurred' particularly that of the impugned order having never being served upon the petitioner, the Appellate Authority is expected to get the facts verified from the records as to whether the impugned order-in- etrtloner Original dated 3}.ll.2O2I had been at all dispatched to $e3 3 or not and whether there is suffrcient proof of service of the same which could be easily tracked from the postal Department. So also the Appqlate Authority can get it verified whether the direction given to the Superintendent of Central Tax, GST Range to get a copy of Order- in-Original to the assessee has been complied with or not. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, TJ 1. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Mehdipatnam GST Division ' 'tfi;;;i;J Commissionerate H.No. 1o- 3- 301- 303, 2nd Floor' Serene H6ionts-, Humayunnagar, Masab Tank, Hyderq.ba{-500028 z. sriiliintbi-,Je\"t 6i cen\"trai tax-, Snivrampa'ny GST Ranse, Mehdipatnam_GST ' 6iiliil;,\"i;;;;;;ro-cbi corrisiione'rate n No 10- 3 -301 -303' 2nd Floor' SerEilt He(artt., Humayunnagar, Masab Tank, Hyderabad -500028 3. 5i;6 #i6f-irioia, tnriustriaiEstate Area, Kattedan, Hvderabad' Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500077 1. 3l:t3 3 ,i[t t?8R\"\"\".'.xi.3\":\",i*1\"{i&r'uo, ;: 5n; Cc 6 Mi;. -oominic Fernindez, SC for cBlc[oPUC] 7. Two CD CoPies ot'c*( # -l HIGH COURT DATED:1 310212024 ORDER WP.No.19833 of 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION I WITHOUT COSTS. 1ir'; SlAf(. (_l* 10 APB 2024 O5S PATCT gO a^ * c o * 0ut\",r$ "