Dhantla Aadi Reddy vs. Deputy State Tax Officer - Telangana High Court, 11 March 2026

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 34881 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN NO Between: Dhantla Aadi Reddy, S/o. Anji Reddy age 36 years, Trade Name: M/s. Naganjaneya Traders, Door N6.5-143, -Grolnd Fl<ior, Railway Station Road, Mahabubnagar, Telangana-509001 ...PETITIONER AND 1. Deputy State Tax Officer, Mahabubnagar Circle, Nalgonda Division. 2. Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. 3 S1g]!e_of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (CT-ll) Department, Secreiariat, Hydbrabad. 4 lnig.l of lndia, rep. by its Secretary, Minisky of Finance, Jeevan Deep Buitding, r Floor, Sansad Marg, Ndw Delhi_ilO OO1. Petition under Articre 226 ot the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit rireJ ineiewitn, ttre Hijrr 'cJu.t ,"y u" pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus o, ;"t ;il;; appropriate writ or order or direction-setting aside the show ""r"" noii.t u"ilo rs.+.2025 and order dated 14 5'2025 passed bv rhe 1st nesponoeni ""n-irring the petitioners GST R^egistration as confirhed ov tne zno-ne-siond;;^ the appeflate order dated 121?:.?o^?.?-:: beins.in srosi viotation "t pri."ipr", of naturatjustice, not based on any evrdence, high handed, arbitrary.and i"!i*. violation of the petitioners tunclamental right of freedom under Articre r gti)tiri"r tn" constitution of rndia. Petition under section ,1sl .cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in suoport of the peiitio;, it'. iign court may be preased to grant interim suspension'or tno oriJi 'j""j'i+f!.2025 passed by the 1st Respondent, pending disposal of the writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardshiP' CounselforthePetitioner:SRIKARTHIKRAMANAPUTTAMREDDY CounselfortheRespondentNo'1to3:SRISWAROOPOORILLA' SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX Counsel for the Respondent No'4: SRI N' BHUJANGA RAO' DeputY Solicitor General of lndia

The Court made the following: ORDER

ard 4 f Dated: 11.03'2026 Between: Mr. Dhantla Aadi ReddY i ;J;i*;;;, *^ T11:ll:t?,ilTHlion Rou,r, D-No.5-143, Cround B "dd;;; ;;r, rera nga na-soeoo I and DeputY State Tax Officer Mahabubnagar utrcle' s"ie;"d" tliision and 3 othcrs Order: HeardMr.KarthikRamanaPuttamreddy,learnedcounselforthe petitionerandMr.Swaroopoorilla,learnedSpecialGovernmentPleader tbr State 'fax appearing fbr respondent's No' l to 3' 2. 'Ihe irnpugned show cause notice in F'orm GST REG-17 datedt5.04.2025.issuedunderRule22(l)oftheGoodsandServicesTax Rutes.20l7 (for short'the Rules'), for oancellation of GST registration of thepetitioncrandthcconscquentialordercl[.cancellationofregistrationin FoTmGSTREG-lgctated|4.o5.2o25.passedbyresponrjentNo.lunder Rule 22(3) of the Rules, are under challertge' ...Petitioner ...ResPondents I I 3. The petitioner has also challenged thc appellate order dated 29'12'2025' rvhereby the order of canceration of GST registration has br:en conflrrnecl 4' The primary ground of,charenge to a, these proceedings is absence of prooer reasons in the show cause notice and in trre order or.canceration and deniar of opportunity of hearing by the apperate authority. 5' Learned counser for the petitioner submits that except stating that there is vioration of Section 2g(2)(e)of.the Go.as and services .r-ax Acr. 2017 (f'x shorr 'the GST Act')- in obtai,ing regisrrarion by rraud, wir.rl misstatement or suppression of fbcts. no otrrer supporting rnateriars were enclosed to the show cause notice. Though a fonnar reprv *,45 not fired by the petitioner to the show cause notice, he had appeared berore the propcr officer a,d exprained the reasons fbr amendrnent to the prace of business, l{Owevef. without considering thc sarne, the impu_qned order was passed. only quoting the rerevant provision of section 2g(2)(e) of the GST Acr. without a,y findings. [t is subrnitted that the appear pretbrred against the impugned order was disposed ol'by seeking pararvise remarks fiorn the Deputy Sr,te I'ax oflicer, Mahabubnagar circre. without notice to the petitioner, on the contents thereof. It is therefore in vioratio' of the ptOCedUfe preScribed under Section 29(2)(e) of the GST Act and the i

t I relevant Rules. Therefore, the petitioner has assailed the impugned proceedings

Leamed Special Government Pleader for State Tax submits, on instructions, that the impugned show causc and the impugned order of cancellation of registration of course does not reflect the findings on the basis of which the registration of the petitioner was cancelled and they only quote relevant provision of Section 29(2)(e) of the GST Act. He submits that the matter can be remanded to the proper off,rcer, who would pass a \ fresh order, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances noted above and since it appears that the impugned show cause notice and the impugned order of cancellation of registration suffer from non-application of mind and are bereft of any reasons or findings, the same cannot be upheld in the eye of law. It further appears that the appellate authority has also asked for parawise remarks from Deputy State Tax Officer, Mahabubnagar Circle, on the appeal filed by the petitioner and the petitioner appeared on 19.09.2025, but the remarks obtained from the Deputy State Tax Officer, Mahabubnagar Circle, were not given to the petitioner to controvert the same.

In view of the above, the impugned sholv cause notice and the order \I of cancellation of registration dated 14.05.2025 and also the appellate order

4 O dated 2).12.2025 are set aside and the matter is rernanded to the proper officer to pass a fresh order in accordance r,vith law vvithin a period of lour s'ceks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving an opportur ity o[ submitting reply and personal hearing to the petitioner. Petitioner should appear before the proper officer on23.03.2026. 9. Ttre Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, rniscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed. '-A. SRINIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR ,/TRUE GOPY'/ SECTION OFFICER dl l! To, 1 2 3 4 5 6. 7 lndia [OPLlC]

Two CD Copies BN BS w

HIGH COURT DATED:1110312026 ;ri ll''4;a. q;t o (J 0g tPtt ruau \ '+\ T'\r ) s. * ORDER WP.No.3914 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS *teA \o -ffi.