M/S. Apoorva It Solutions PVT. LTD vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Central Tax
Facts
The appellant, M/s. Apoorva IT Solutions Pvt. Ltd., is aggrieved by the order dated 12.12.2025 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Hyderabad. The primary challenge to the impugned order was that the CESTAT failed to consider the demand being barred by limitation, a ground consistently raised by the appellant before all authorities. The CESTAT, however, proceeded to decide the issue of penalty imposition under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, in favour of the appellant. The present appeal questions the demand itself on the grounds of delay.
Held
The High Court held that the ground raised by the appellant in the present appeal, questioning the demand on the basis of limitation, was not sustainable. The Court referred to paragraph 3 of the impugned order of the CESTAT, which indicated that the appellant was not contesting the demand of service tax on merit but was contesting the imposition of penalty. The Court further noted that the appellant's submission about having a bonafide belief and availing the amnesty scheme under SVLDRS strengthened the finding that the appellant was not contesting the demand on any ground except limitation. Given this, the Court concluded that the appeal was not sustainable and therefore rejected it. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CESTAT erred in not considering the aspect of the demand being barred by limitation, as agitated by the appellant. The petitioner's contention is that the CESTAT failed to consider the crucial ground of limitation, which was consistently raised by them before all authorities. They argue that the Tribunal, by ignoring this aspect, wrongly proceeded to decide the issue of penalty imposition. The petitioner asserts that the present appeal is filed specifically to question the very demand on the ground of delay. The respondent (revenue) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the issue of limitation. However, the judgment notes that the appellant, in paragraph 3 of the impugned order, submitted that they were not contesting the demand of service tax on merit but were contesting the imposition of penalty. The appellant also stated they had a bonafide belief that the service was in the nature of export and not liable to service tax, and had disclosed information to the investigating agency and availed the amnesty scheme under SVLDRS.
Sections Cited
Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDTKONDA CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO:1 30F 2026 Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1g44 aggrieved by the Final order dated 12'12-2025 in service Tax Appear No. 30591 ot 2025 passed by the customs, Excise and Service Tax Appeflate Tribunar, (cESTAT) Hyderabad in Final Order No. Al3O571l2O25 Between: IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX M/s. Apoorva lT Solutions pvt. Ltd, H.No. g-1_9/p/30, plot No. 29 and 30, Padma Nagar Colony, Karmanghat, Hyderabad, f-tanlana 500 079 Central VIP Hills, 43447 | ...Appellant ... Respondent ( AND The Principal Commissioner of Commissionerate, H.No.1-gg-7_43, Hyderabad 500 0Bi Tax, Ranga Reddy GST Jaihind Enclave, Madhapur, Counsel for the Appeltant: SRI PRAHLAD G, REPRESENTTNG SRI KARAN TALWAR Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following: JUDGMENT
'ryry IN THE TIIGH CoURT FOR THE STATE OF TBLANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE IIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA C.E.A No.l3 OF 2026 t7.04.2026 Between: M/s A
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.