APHC010437872024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3508] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 22808/2024 Between: M/s. Venkatrama Constructions, ...PETITIONER AND Assistant Commissioner State Tax and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner who is in the business of execution of work contracts has approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition challenging the show-cause notice, in Form GST DRC-01, dated 28.12.2023 on the ground that the same could not have been issued without prior issuance of Form GST DRC-01A, under the Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and also on the ground that the show-cause notice does not contain a verifiable DIN number. 2 2. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the prior notice, in Form GST DRC-01A, under the Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 had not been issued to the petitioner. 3. This Court in case of New Morning Star Travels Vs. The Deputy Commissioner (ST) & Ors 1 had held that issuance of notice, under Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, for any pre-amendment period prior to October-2020 is mandatory and non issuance of such notice would render all further proceedings non-est. 4. Sri P. Karthik Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner would also contend that the show-cause notice could not have been issued under Section 74 of the GST Act, in as much as the show-cause notice has been issued on the basis of the returns filed by the petitioner and no fresh material or additional material had been relied upon to contend that there has been willful suppression or misstatement of facts, by the petitioner, for attracting the provisions of Section 74 of the GST Act. 5. 5. In view of the fact that, prior intimation in Form GST DRC-01A had not been issued, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition by setting aside the impugned show-cause notice, dated 28.12.2023, leaving it open to the 1st respondent to initiate proceedings in accordance with law and also after taking into account the submission of the petitioner that a notice under Section 74 of the GST Act could not have been issued when such a notice relies only upon the information submitted by the petitioner itself. 1 2023 [79] G.S.T.L. 430; MANU/AP/2323/2023. 3 6. It would also be necessary to record the concession made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, on behalf of the petitioner, that the issue of limitation would not be raised by the petitioner even if notice is issued under Section 73 of the GST Act. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J BSM 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO:22808 of 2024 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 19-02-2025 BSM