Telangana High Court
WP/17201/2025 of M/s. MAYTAS-NCC(JV) Vs The Assistant Commissioner of CT -III on 10 December 2025
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 17201 OF 202s Between: M/s.
t 348e I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 17201 OF 202s
Between:
M/s. IvIAYTAS-NCC(JV), Door No. 8-2-120111O1117, Nandinagar, Road No.14, Banjara Hills, Hydera bad-500033, Rep.by its Authorized Signatory Sri Hari Venkata Ramana
...PETITIONER
AND
The Assistant Commissroner of CT -lll, Enf. Wing, O/o The commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally, Hyderabad.
2. The Commercial Tax Officer, Jubilee Hills Hyderabad.
3. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Commercial Tax Building, Nampally, Hyderabad.
Circle, Punjagutta Division,
Government of Telangana,
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Secretary, (Revenue) CT Dept., Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.
, ..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 Writ of lr/andamus or any other writ order or direction declaring the action of the 1 respondent and 2nd respondent in not refunding excess ITC
lying to the credit of the petitioner even after expiry of more than 9 years is illegal, arbilraty, high-handed and declare the petitioner is entitled for refund of Rs.
4,64,64,3401- along with applicable interest to be calculated till payment in terms of Section 2O(4) rcad with Section 38(6) and Section 38(1 )(b) of TVAT Act, 2005.
IANO:1OF202s
Petition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the cir )umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou. may be pleased To direct the 1s[ respondent to forthwith initiate steps to procr,: s thr: clainr of refunC
as per annual return filed for [he assessment year 2005-2C ] ;pending dlsposal of the Writ Petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V.SIDDHARTH REDDY
Counsel forthe Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, S C FOR STATE TAX
The Court made the following: ORDER
\
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE ()F TILANGANA AT YDERABAD
THE HONOTIRABLE, SRI .IT]STICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
TTIE, HONOT-iRABI,E SRI JTIS-TICE SUDDALA CHALAPAI'HI RAO
WRIT PETITION No.17201 OF 2025
Date:10.12.2025
Betwccn:
M/S.MAYTAS-NCC(Jv)
Banjara Hills, Hyderabad,
Rep.bl, its authorized signatorl,. Sri Hari Venkata Ramana petitioner .,\nd The Assistant Commissioner of CT-lll.
Nampalll . Hyderabad and others.
...Respondents
ORDER, (per Hon'ble Sri .Justice l'.hun Koshr)
Heard Mr V.Siddharth Reddy, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Swaroop Oorilla, leamed Special Govemment Pleader for State Tax, appearing for the respondents and perused the record
2.
Having gone through the pleadings made in the writ petition and upon hearing the leamed Special Government Pleader, we find that the claim of refund rnade b1,the petitioner for the year 2005-06
and the present writ petition is one which filed after twentl,years in 202-5. i{crvever, there seems to be no representatic I made by the petitioner to the resoondent-authorities during this l eriod, at least.
they are not enclosed along rvith the writ petition the petitioner first approach the concerncd - sporrdent.
l.
ln.,'ierv of the same. qe are of the considererl rpinion that lel lespondent No.2 in this case with an appi.t,1 riatc derailcd leprcsentation in respect of its clairlr. Let the saiC rrr ,reserntation be rnade rvithin a period of three weeks. Upon sr.Lcir replesentation being made, respondent No.2 is expected to consiti, !- rhe same on its own merits after verification of the request ivilhir an outer ]iixi[
of another eight weeks there from.
1.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposc of-. No or.der as to costs Misceilaneous applications penciing, if arr shall stand closed.
SD/,(. BHAVANI SWAMY
SI ISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
\SECTION OFFICER
To,
The Assistant Commissioner of CT -lll, Enf Wing'
Commlrciat Taxes, Nampally, Hyderabad '
lc he commissioner of
2. The Commercial Tax Officer, Jubilee Hills Circle' Punia lutta Division'
Hyderabad.
3. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes' Governmert lf Telangana'
" d;;;;i;aiax Buildlns, Nampallv' Hvderabad
4. The Secretary, (Revenue) CT Dept ' Secretariat' Telar lana State Hyderabad.
5. One CC to SRI V.SIDDHARTH REDDY' Advocate [C t UC]
-';ffi$ffit
6. One CC to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL G P for State Tax [OPUC]
7. Two CD Copies.
BSK
BS
W
t
HIGH COURT
DATED:1011212025
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
\ 1 rrF- JA \)/ i\l )' /J I lr \>, 'ir.* \\
WP.No.17201 of 2025 Qs.51..,'-r. 1 '"i:--:- - DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS "4d q fr.a* Z i.