M/S. Jyothi Infraventures Limited, vs The Superintendent Of Central Tax,
2024 Latest Caselaw 3719 Tel

Telangana High Court

M/S. Jyothi Infraventures Limited, vs The Superintendent Of Central Tax, on 9 September, 2024

                  THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                  AND
                 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU
                          RAJESHWAR RAO

                          WRIT PETITION No.21884 of 2024


ORDER:

(Per Hon'ble Justice Sujoy Paul)

Sri Harsha Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner,

Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for

CBIC, for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned

counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy

Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.3.

2. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the

petitioner relied on judgment of Madras High Court in the case of

Tvl. Sastha Engineering Works v. State Tax Officer (Circle) 1,

which was followed by this Court in W.P.No.21616 of 2024,

decided on 12.08.2024.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of

petitioner is covered by the aforesaid order dated 12.08.2024 and

it may be disposed of in the same lines.

4. Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for

CBIC, opposed the prayer, but did not dispute that the matter is,

indeed, similar to W.P.No.21616 of 2024. The only distinction is

2022 SCC OnLine Mad 8452

that the judgment of Madras High Court and this Court are based

on merits, whereas in the instant case, the Appellate Authority

has dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of limitation,

otherwise, the issue is similar.

5. Considering the aforesaid, we deem it proper to set aside the

order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority. The

appeal is restored to its original number. The petitioner shall file

his reply. In view of judgment of Madras High Court in Tvl.

Sastha Engineering Works (supra), the Appellate Authority shall

decide the appeal on merits and not on the ground of limitation.

Needless to mention that the conditions mentioned in paragraph

No.4 of the judgment of Madras High Court shall be followed by

the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

_____________ Sujoy Paul, J

_______________________________ Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J

09th September, 2024 Myk/Gvr