Syed Ather vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer

WP/7932/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01016302202617 March 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN5 pages

For Respondent: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVT, PLEADER FOFI STATE TAX

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Syed Ather, proprietor of M/s S.H.A. Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice (SCN) in Form GST REG-17, dated May 29, 2025, issued by the Deputy State Tax Officer. The petitioner contended that the SCN was arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction. He also claimed he could not file a reply because it could not be uploaded on the portal within the prescribed time. His registration was previously suspended on November 28, 2024, for cancellation, but this suspension was revoked on January 17, 2025. The petitioner further stated that the impugned SCN did not clearly specify the alleged contraventions, and while supportive documents were mentioned as annexed, they were not provided. The revenue did not file a reply to the writ petition.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition with directions. It noted that although the SCN was issued on May 29, 2025, no order had yet been passed. The Court directed that if the supporting documents were not supplied to the petitioner, they should be provided within one week. Subsequently, the petitioner was to file a manual reply within two weeks, if not already filed. The Proper Officer was directed to pass an order on the impugned SCN within two weeks thereafter, with the liberty to pass the order within the timeframe even if the petitioner failed to file a reply within the stipulated period. No order as to costs was made. The Court did not explicitly decide on the legality or arbitrariness of the SCN itself, focusing instead on procedural directions to ensure a fair process.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notice in Form GST REG-17, dated May 29, 2025, issued by the Deputy State Tax Officer, is void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? The petitioner argued that the SCN was issued without clear contraventions being stated and that the necessary supporting documents were not annexed, thereby violating principles of natural justice. He also claimed an inability to file a reply due to portal issues. The respondents, represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

Sections Cited

CGST Act, 2017, TGST Act, 2017

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[34881 . IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF INARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 7932 OF 2026 Between Syed Ather, S/o Seed Basith, Aged 23 years, Proprietor of tt//s. S.H.A. Enterprises Rlo, 12-1-868, Asif Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 028. ..PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy State Tax Officer, Rajendranagar-|, Saroornagar Division, Gagan Vihar Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana -500 028. 2. State of Telangana, Through Principal Secretary to Government Revenue Department (Commercial Tax), Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 028. .....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, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the impugned SCN in the Form GST REG-17 vide ref No. 243605251656193 dated 29.05.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 1 under the provisions of CGST/TGST Act, 2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and to consequently set aside the same. |.A.NO:1 OF 2026 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay i. I I I : i i operation of impugned SCN in the Form GST REG-17 vide ref No 2A3605251656193 dated 29.A5.2025 issued by the Respondent No.1. Counsel for the.' Petitioner : SRI P.VENKATA PRASAD, COUNSEL REPRESENTING M/s P.V.PRASAD ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondents : SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVT PLEADER FOFI STATE TAX

The Court made the following ORDER I j i ; ! * I t i! i II t ! i I I t!III, III I I I III $ lr li lit:

IN TT{E HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD I If i i I i i I i ; t I I i ! : BLE THE AND SRI WRIT PETITIO No.7932 of 2026 DATED: 17.03.2026 Between: Syed Ather, S/o. Syed Basith Petitioner AND The Deputy State Tax Officer, Raj e ndran agarl, S aroornagar Division, Gagan Vihar Compex, Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana- 500 028 & another Respondents ORDER Heard Mr. P.Venkata Prasad, learned counsel representing IWs. P V Prasad Associates appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oori[[a, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appearing for the respondents.

The grievance of the petitioner is against the issuance of show cause \ notice in Form GST REG-17 dated 29.05.2025 as arbitrary, illegal and without . I I i i i 1 tt ? t t I I i I i! I * *t e ! & TII !,I t riI ru x I \ juri iction. [t is also submitted that no repty could be filed as it could not be \\. uploaded on the portal beyond the time prescribed. It is also stated that his registration was earlier suspended with effect from 28.11.2024 on an earlier

I show cause notice for cancellation dated 28.11.2024 but the said suspension was revoked with effect from 17.01.2025 in Form GST REG-20. Again the impugned shc'w cause notice has been issued without stating the alleged contraventions in clear terms. However, a perusal of the impugned show cause notice shows that it annexes the supportive documents attached for case specific details, but the sarne has not been annexed.

Upon hr:aring leamed counsel for the parties, it appears that though the show cause notice has been issued on 29.05.2025, but petitioner claims that no order has been passed thereupon. [n such a case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the supporting documents have not been supplied to the petitioner, the same be supplied within one week from today. Thereafter, the petitioner shall file his reply manually within two weeks, if not already filed. The Proper Olficer shall pass an order, if not already passed, on the impugned show cause notice within two weeks thereafter. It will be open for the Proper Officer to pass, the order within the time frame in case the petitioner fails to file his reply within time. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellerneous applications pending, if any, _shal I stand closed. ABDULLAH KHAN TANT REGISTRAR ///' SECTION OFFICER To Gagan

1.2.

Tax), 3 4 R

SA BS YY

HIGH COURT DATED:17103t202G ORDER WP.No.7932 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. .j! n 1j I g APtl ?tzt i I * 9 q'-R@ frs

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.