Pedestal Infra Developers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent Of Central Tax

WP/5989/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01011698202626 February 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN7 pages

For Petitioner: SRI PUPPALA BHARATH NANDANFor Respondent: SRI D. RAGHAVENDAR RAO, SENIOR S.C. FOR CBIC

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Pedestal Infra Developers Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the order of cancellation of its GST registration, passed by the Superintendent of Central Tax on January 17, 2025. The registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner stated that there were no outstanding GST dues and the non-filing was due to a bona fide impression by their accountant that there was no business activity during the relevant period. The petitioner was unable to file an appeal due to the time-bar and sought direction for the competent authority to entertain their application manually. The respondent submitted that the cancellation was due to non-filing of returns.

Held

The Court did not delve into the merits of the cancellation order. Instead, it allowed the petitioner liberty to approach the competent authority within two weeks with an application explaining the delay in filing returns. If the competent authority is satisfied with the reasons for the delay, they are to decide the application on its merits. The petitioner can raise all grounds, both factual and legal, in this application. The Court disposed of the writ petition with this direction, noting that it was not inclined to enter into the merits of the issue at this stage. No specific mention was made of any issue being left undecided, other than the merits of the cancellation itself.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should entertain a writ petition for revocation of GST registration cancellation when the petitioner is time-barred from filing an appeal, and if so, under what circumstances? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and the powers of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the cancellation was arbitrary and illegal, contrary to GST provisions and judicial pronouncements. They contended that the non-filing of returns was unintentional and due to a bona fide belief of no business activity. They also asserted that there were no outstanding GST dues. Since the GST portal did not permit a late application for revocation, they prayed for a direction to the respondent to entertain their application manually. Respondent's arguments: The respondent's counsel stated they had no instructions regarding the petitioner's assertion of no outstanding dues. However, they confirmed that the apparent reason for cancellation was the non-filing of returns for six consecutive months.

Sections Cited

Article 226 of the Constitution of India

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Pedestal lnfra Developers Private Limited, Representeg by ilt, Vqqqging Director Sf ineO SiOOGui, age<i about 66 years, Occupaiion. B_usiness2l-1-921A B Darwaza AVJshi neiiOeniy Moti tvlasjid Ndyapool Hyderabad, Telangana 500002 ...PETITIONER The superintendent of central Tar fq!h."rg.tli^9clT Range, Falaknuma Cc-Sf-6irision, 2nd Floor, H.No.10-3-301 to 303, Se19n9 Heighls..,^above nrtn"OJ"p Sup'ertrrtarket, Humayan Nagar, Masabtank, Hyderabad-500028' Union of lndia Represented by its Secretary, Department of Revenue Ministry of Finance North Block New Delhi 110001 ...RES'ONDENTS [ 3488 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT P TITION NO:5989 oF 2026 Between: AND 1. 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 or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mlandamus setting aside the Order for Cancellation of Registration passed by the first respondent in Form GST REG - 19, vide Ref. No.2A360125039497E dated 17.01.2025 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017|TGST Act 2017, and contrary to the Judicial pronouncements of this Hon'ble Court on the self-same subject and violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution 2 of lndia lA NO: 1 OF 12026 Petitiorr underSection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit "iled in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the ,rperation of the Order for Cancellation of Registration passed by the first respondent in Form GST REG - 19 vide Ref No 2A360125039497E dated 17.01.2025, F'ending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PUPPALA BHARATH NANDAN Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI D. RAGHAVENDAR RAO, SENIOR S.C. FOR CBIC Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI M.S. ACHYUTH BHARTHWAJ

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRJ APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE G.M.MOHIUDDTN PETITI DIITED z 26.02.2026 Between: Pedestal Infra Developers Private Limited Petitioner AND The Superintendent of Central Tax, Masab tank, Hyderabad, and another ... Respondents ORDER: Sri P. Bharath Nandan, learned counsel appears fbr petitioner. Sri D. Raghavendar Rao, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs appears for respondent No.l. Sri M.S. Achyuth Bharthwaj, learned counsel appears for respondent No.2. /

2 HCJ (AKrS, J) & cMM, J W.P.No.5989 of 2O26 2- The Goods and Services Tax (GST) Registration Certificate of the petitioner bearing No.36,{4LCp7ol3LlzR was c:ancelled vide Order for Cancellation of Registration passed in Form GST REG-19 dated 17.01 .2a25 for non-filing of retums for a consecutive period of six months. Now, it is time-barred to prefer an appeal by, the petitioner against the order of cancellation of GST Registration Certificate. Therelbre, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for revocation of cancellation of GST Registration Certificate. 3. l.earned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no Gc'ods and Services Tax dues reft to be paid by the petitiorrer. It is submitted that non-filing of returns was for the reason that the accountant of the petitioner had not filed returns on the bona fide impression that the petitioner had no busine:;s during the relevant tax period and there was no intentional delay. Though the petitioner has sought to file an application fbr revocation of cancellation of GST Registration certific:ate, the GST portal does not permit the petitioner as being beyond the time limit prescribed for submission. /

3 HC, LAKTS, Jl & OMM. J w.P.No.5989 of 2O26 Therefore, the petitioner prays that respondent No.l may be directed to entertain the petitioner's application manually and take a decision thereupon in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for respondent No.l submits that he does not have instruction on the assertion that no outstanding dues remain against the petitioner. He, however, submits that the apparent reason for cancellation of GST Registration Certificate was on account of non-filing of returns for the consecutive period of six months.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances as noted above, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the issue as the petitioner is being allowed liberty to approach the competent authority. It may approach the competent authority within a period of two (2) weeks with an application explaining the delay. If the competent authority is satisfied with the reasons for delay, he shall decide the application on merits. It is open for the petitioner to take all such grounds in t \ law and on facts in the application.

4 HCJ (,AIKS. J} & GMM. J W.P.No.5989 of 2O26 To MI' BS

The instant Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand clrsed. .P.C. SULEKHA DEVI TANT REGISTRAR //// OFFICER The Siuperintendent CGST bivision, 2nd Ratnadeep Super Ma

The Secretary, Department of Revenue Ministry of Finance, Union of lndia North Block New Delhi - 110001

One C;C to SRI PUPPALA BHARATH NANDAN, Advocate IOPUC]

One C:C to SRI D. RAGHAVENDAR RAO, Senior S.C. for CBIC IOPUC] 5 One CC to sRl M.s. AcHYUTH BHARTHWAJ, Advocate [OPUC]

Two C;D Copies Hr 1 /

) HIGH COURT DATED i2610212026 ORDER WP.No.5989 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 4(d &. i) iJ t * o H 1 c l\fl tjt 202[ 5 2 * I

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.