Facts of the Case

This common order disposed of five connected writ petitions (W.P.Nos.20731, 24077, 27416, 28893 and 30267 of 2025) arising from a shared grievance: assessing officers of the Telangana State Tax and Central Tax departments had issued multiple show cause notices, and consequently passed multiple Orders-in-Original, for the identical tax period under Section 73 of the CGST/TGST/IGST Acts. In W.P.No.27416 of 2025, the petitioner, SSV Sri Power Technologies & Services, challenged unsigned show cause notices and demand orders for FY 2019-2020 raising duplicate CGST/SGST liability. Other petitions in the batch involved unsigned orders, orders duplicating an earlier demand for the same period, an order passed in the name of a different company for the same tax period, and a plea of res judicata where an earlier proceeding for the same period had already been dropped without departmental appeal.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether multiple show cause notices and multiple Orders-in-Original passed by the same assessing officer for an identical tax period and the same taxable event are legally sustainable.
  2. What remedy is available to taxpayers subjected to such duplicate proceedings, particularly where appeals were rejected on grounds of delay without addressing the underlying anomaly.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned orders were unsigned and could not be reconciled with each other, since separate Orders-in-Original imposed different tax liabilities on the same assessee for the same financial year.
  • Appeals against such orders had been dismissed purely on delay, without the appellate authority appreciating the anomaly of multiple, sometimes contradictory, proceedings for one tax period.
  • In one matter, it was contended that proceedings were barred by res judicata since an earlier demand for the same period had been dropped by an unappealed order-in-original.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The learned Advocate General produced a circular (No.CCT's Ref.No.LIV(2)/33/2025, dated 14.10.2025) prescribing a Standard Operating Procedure empowering the proper officer to rectify multiple orders for the same cause of action, issue, period and taxable event under Section 161 of the TGST Act, including deleting duplicated tax components and reporting revenue-prejudicial errors to the revisional authority.
  • It was submitted that these grievances were amenable to rectification under Section 161 rather than requiring separate adjudication of each writ petition.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court noted the Department's proposed mechanism under Section 161 of the TGST Act — including the second proviso, under which the ordinary six-month limitation for rectification does not apply — as an appropriate and consonant means of resolving the anomaly of duplicate notices/orders.
  • All five writ petitions were disposed of, directing the concerned proper officers to undertake rectification of the impugned notices/orders in accordance with law, within a reasonable time and with due intimation to the assessees.
  • Liberty was reserved to petitioners to raise before the appropriate forum any grievance not amenable to rectification under Section 161, and directions were given that any refund resulting from rectification be processed by the proper officer as per law.

Important Clarification

  • Issuance of multiple show cause notices and multiple Orders-in-Original by the same assessing officer for one financial year and the same cause of action is impermissible, and taxpayers facing such duplication are not confined only to filing separate appeals against each order.
  • The Section 161 rectification mechanism — reinforced by the second proviso's extension of the ordinary limitation and now backed by a departmental SOP — is available to correct such multiplicity administratively, including deleting the duplicated tax component and reporting revenue-prejudicial errors internally for revisional action.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, CGST/TGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not paid, under which the original show cause notices and orders were issued.
  • Section 161, CGST/TGST Act, 2017 — rectification of errors apparent on the face of the record, including its second proviso.
  • Sections 107(2) and 108, TGST Act, 2017 — revisional powers, invoked where rectification reveals an order prejudicial to revenue.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions — in substance favourable to the Assessees, who obtain an administrative rectification route for the duplicate proceedings, with liberty reserved for any residual grievance.

Case Details

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad; Common Order in W.P.Nos.20731, 24077, 27416, 28893 and 30267 of 2025 (lead reference W.P.No.27416 of 2025 — SSV Sri Power Technologies & Services); Coram: Hon'ble The Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Hon'ble Sri Justice G.M. Mohiuddin; Date of Order: 15.10.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.