M/S. S. Malta Reddy And Company vs. Deputy Commissioner - 2 - Telangana High Court, 08 April 2026

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

I i [ 3488 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY' THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL NruO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRIAPARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 10317 OF 2026 Between M/s. S. Malta Reddy and Company, rep. by |E Partner, Ms. Srigiri Kavitha, 6-3-642, fitr" Nagar, Karimnagar, Telangana-S05 001: ..'ET.T'ONER 1. Deputy commissio net _ 2,,r1g," ;:lrr, =_**rement wing, o/o commissioner orcoti r"rcial Taxes, Nampally, Hyderabad-' 2. Assistant Commissioner (State f"i".)' Karimnagar-ll Circle, Warangal Division' ,. Iii?:t"?%,"nnrn", rep. by its secretary to Government (Revenue) cr-r, State TaxlCommercialTaxesDepartment,secretariat,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 Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction by setting aside the impugned order dated 7.11.2025 along with proceedings in Form DRC-07 vide Ref.No.ZD361 125022'r36U, dated 7.11.2025 and the rejection'of ttre rectification application vide proceeding dated 12-1.2026 by the 1st Respondent for the tax period April, 2021 toMarch, 2022 onthe ground that they are illegal' arbitrary and are issued contrarytotherecordandalsotheprovisionsoftheCentralGoodsandServiceTax Act,20lTandtheTelanganaGoodsandServicesTaxAct'2017' i I j l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in sr.rpport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceerdings pursuant to the impugned order dated 711.2025 along with proceedings in Form DRC-07 vide Ref.No.ZD361 125022136U dated 7.11.2025 and the rejection of the rectification application vide proceeding dated 12.1.2026 by the 1st Respondent for the tax period Apnl, 2o21to March, 2022 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2O17 and the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act,2017 pending disposal of the \A/rit Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel forthe Petitioner: SRI K.P.AMARNATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVT - PLEADER FOR STATE TN(

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No. 10317 of 2026 DATED z 08.04.2026 Between: iWs. S. Malla Reddy and Company Rep. by its Partner, Ms. Srigiri Kavitha ... Petitioner AND Deputy Commissioner - 2 (State Taxes), Enforcement Wing, O/o Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad and two others Respondents ORDER: Sri K.P. Amarnath Reddy, learned counsel appears for petitioner. Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appears for respondents.

The instant Writ Petition has been preferred against the order dated 07.11 .2025 passed Lrnder Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act,20lTlState Goods and Services \ Tax Act, 2Ol7 (for short 'the Act'), along with the proceedings

2 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM.., W. P. No. l 03 l 7 of 202fi in FoRM GST DRC-07 dated 07.1I .2025 and the rectiFrcation rejection order dated 12.01.2026 passed by respondent No.l.

Learned counsel for the state Tax submits that the proper remedy for the petitioner is to prefer an appeal.

However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitic'ner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal againsrt the impugned order. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in approaching the appellate authority and therefore, he may be directed to consider it sympathetically. 5. rUpon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and havin6; regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of the view that since the impugned rectification rejection order did not vary the impugned order, the petitioner may prefer an appeal against the impugned Order-in-Original within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit along with a delay condonation application. Thereupon, the learned appellzrte authority would consider the same in accordance , I n with law taking into consideration that the petitioner has been 3 HCJ {AKrS, Jl &CMM, J W.P.No. lO317 of 2O26 pursuing the writ remedy before this Court in the meantime as well. The petitioner will be at liberty to take all the grounds in law and on facts before the appellate authority. tf the appellate authority is satisfied that the delay is properly explained, he would proceed to consider the appeal on merits. Let it be made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case of the To PSK. TKS parties The instant Writ Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed '. T.SREENIVAS REDDY ASSISTANT //'/ SECTION OFFICER

Deputy Commissionet - 2, (State Taxes), ng' O/o Commissioner Warangal Division, of Commercial Taxes, NamPallY, HYderabad

Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes), Telangana

Secreiary to Government (Revenue) CT-lt, State Tax I Commercial Taxes Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana'

One CC to SRI K.P.AMARNATH REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

ONE CC tO SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOW PLEADER FOR STATE TAX [OPUC]

Two CD Copies @l-

HIGH GOIJRT DATED: 0810412026 ORDER WP.No.10317 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ES 14 C) (J 2 I npR zozn * ) I, 2:.cr./ 1 .i PAT