M/S. Kunchey Venkata Sree Satya Manideep vs. Deputy State Tax Officer

WP/4508/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01008922202616 February 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN6 pages

For Petitioner: SRI K. P. AMARNATH REDDYFor Respondent: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Kunchey Venkata Sree Satya Manideep, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of its GST registration (No. 36DUBPM4909N1Z6) by the Deputy State Tax Officer (1st Respondent) on March 24, 2023. The cancellation was due to non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner stated that the non-filing was due to their consultant's oversight, as the proprietor was abroad and believed there was no business. The petitioner was unable to file a revocation application through the GST portal due to time limitations. The petitioner sought a direction for the 1st Respondent to manually entertain their application for revocation.

Held

The Court held that the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled due to non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's submission that the non-filing was not intentional and that they were unable to file a revocation application through the portal due to time constraints. The Court also noted the respondents' agreement to entertain a manual application. Therefore, the Court directed that if the petitioner approaches Respondent No. 1 within one week from the date of the order for submission of a physical application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration, Respondent No. 1 shall entertain it and take a decision in accordance with law within three weeks thereafter. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the 1st Respondent in cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner suo motu is illegal, arbitrary, and in contravention of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and Section 37(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Telangana GST Act, 2017? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the cancellation was illegal and arbitrary, violating their fundamental right to carry on business. They argued that the non-filing of returns was unintentional, caused by a consultant's misunderstanding while the proprietor was abroad. They further argued that the GST portal did not permit them to file a revocation application beyond the prescribed time limit. Respondents' arguments: The Special Government Pleader for State Tax stated that they had no instructions regarding the petitioner's assertion of no outstanding dues. They confirmed that the cancellation was solely for non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. However, they agreed that the petitioner's application could be entertained manually by Respondent No. 1, as the portal did not allow late submissions, and that Respondent No. 1 would consider the application in accordance with law.

Sections Cited

Section 37(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

M/s. Kunchey Venkata Sree Satya Manideep, rep by its Proprielor, Mr. Kunchey Venkata Sree Satya Manideep, # 6-8-102, Ganesh Temple Road, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem, Telangana-S07 101. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Deputy State Tax Officer, O/o Assistant Commissiorier (State Taxes), Kothagudem-l Circle, Warangal Division, Telangana 2. State of Telangana, rep. by its Secretary to Government (Revenue) CT-ll, State Tax / Commercial Taxes Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. [ 34881 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUODIN WRIT PETITION NO:4508 OF 2026 Between: ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 declaring the action of the lst Respondent in cancelling the GST registration certificate of the petitioner vide GST No.36DUBPM4909N1Z6, on suo moto as illegal, arbitrary and in contravention of fundamental right to carry business under Article 19(1Xg) of the Constitution of lndia and also contrary to Section 37(5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and consequently set-aside the order for Cancellation of Registration dated 24.3.2023 of the 1st Respondent. lA NO: I 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 suspend the order of 1st Respondent dated 24.3.2023 and consequently direct the 1"t Respondent to Revive the GST Registration portal of the Petitioner GST No.36DUBPM4S}09Nl26, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. P. AMARNATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX

The Court mader the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD IH EI AND DATED: L6.02.2026 Between: lWs. Kunchey Venkata Sree Satya Manideep, rep. by its Proprietor, Mr. Kunchey Venkata Sree Satya Manideep, # 6-8-L02, Ganesh Temple Road, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem, Telangana-507 I 0 I . ... Petitioner AND Deputy State Tax Officer, O/o. Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes), Kothagudem-I Cjrcle, Warangal Division, Telangana and another Respondents ORDER: Heard IvIr. K.P.Amarnath Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appearing for the respondents.

The GST registration of the petitioner bearing No.36DUBPM4909N1Z6 was cancelled vide impugned order passed in Form GST REG-19 dated 24.03.2023 v for non-filing of returns for a consecutive period of six months. The writ

2 petition has been filed on 11.02.2026 for revocation of the cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner.

Leamed <:ounsel for the petitioner submits that there are no outstanding GST dues left to be paid by the petitioner. It is submitted that non-filing of the retums was for lhe reason that the consultarit of the petitioner has stopped filing retums from the month of February, 2023 on the impression that there is no business since the proprietor of the petitioner was in abroad and the same was not brought to the notice of the petitioner. There was no intentional delay. Though the petitioner has sought to file an application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration, but the GST portal does not permit it as being beyond the timt: lirnit prescribed for submission. Therefore, he prays that respondent No.l may be directed to entertain the petitioner's application manually and take a decision thereupon in accordance with law. 4 Leamed Special Govemment Pleader for State Tax submits'that he does not have instruction on the assertion that no outstanding dues remain against the petitioner. The cancellation of GST registration was only on account of non-filing of retums for the consecutive period of six months. He submits that if the petitioner is directed to approach respondent No.l, its application can be entertained manrrally as the GST,,portal does not permit submission of application beyond the prescribed time limit. It is also submitted that respondent No. I would consider the application in accordance with law.

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also taking note of the fact that the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled on account of non-filing of retums for the consecutive period of six months, in case the petitioner approaches respondent No.l within a period of one week from today for submission of application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration in physical form, respondent No.l would entertain it and take a decision thereupon, in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks thereafter.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed. r-u. s SSISTANT R ,," To SECTION OFFICER

The Deputy State Tax Officer, O/o Assistant Kothagudem-l Circle, Warangal Division, Telang ssioner (State Taxes), ana

The Secretary to Government (Revenue) CT-ll, State Tax / Comrnercial I axes Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

One CC to SRI K. P. AMARNATH REDDY, Advocate tOpUCI

Two CCs to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, Special Government pleader for State Tax, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

Two CD Copies MP BS o

f HIGH COURT DATED:1610212026 -. :-\ 1HE S iAi :::.. /: a\. Lh'.\ l' oo Il) 2 3 ula trllc .- il t SP/TC RDER WP.No.4508 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS 06 t *

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.