M/S. P. Yellaiah vs. Goods And Services Tax Network (Gstn)
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, M/s. P. Yellaiah, is challenging an order dated 03.09.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes) under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Telangana GST Act, 2017. The order imposed a tax liability of Rs. 4,73,950/-, penalty of a similar amount under Section 74(9), and interest of Rs. 2,01,971/- for the periods April and September 2024. The Petitioner claims to have paid outstanding dues after the show cause notice but before the adjudication. The Petitioner corresponded with GSTN to file an appeal without pre-deposit, as tax dues were paid and penalty was disputed. However, the time for filing the appeal expired during this correspondence. The Petitioner seeks a direction to GSTN to provide an effective remedy for filing appeals or to permit manual filing.
Held
The Court held that there is no exemption for any taxpayer from making the pre-deposit while filing an appeal under the GST regime. Whether the liability of penalty or tax was rightly imposed is a matter to be decided on merits by the appellate authority, and this cannot be a ground to seek exemption from pre-deposit. However, acknowledging that the Petitioner was in correspondence with the authorities regarding this issue and missed the cut-off date for filing the appeal, the Court granted liberty to the Petitioner to file the appeal within two weeks, along with a delay condonation application. The Petitioner can raise all grounds of law and facts in the appeal. The appellate authority is directed to consider the question of delay sympathetically, taking into account the circumstances, and if satisfied, proceed to decide the appeal on merits within a reasonable time, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to an effective remedy for filing an appeal against the impugned order dated 03.09.2025, considering the correspondence with GSTN and the expiry of the appeal filing period? 2. Whether the Petitioner can be exempted from the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for filing an appeal, given that the tax dues were allegedly paid and the penalty is disputed? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner contends that they have good grounds to explain the delay in filing the appeal and should not be compelled to make a pre-deposit of 10% against the penalty amount, especially since the tax dues were already paid. They seek either an effective online remedy or permission for manual filing of the appeal. Respondents' Arguments: GSTN submits that it has no power to exempt pre-deposit for filing an appeal. The Assistant Government Pleader for State Tax argues that pre-deposit is a prerequisite for appeal and whether the deposit of tax during adjudication relieves the petitioner of penalty is a matter for the appellate authority. They suggest allowing the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate authority with an explanation for the delay.
Sections Cited
Section 74, Section 74(9), Section 10
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANCANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI.IUSTTCE P.SAM KOSHY ANT) TIIE HONOURABLE SRI.IUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Writ Petition No.3448 of 2026 Dated: 06.02.2026 Between: Mr.P.Yellaiah AND Goods and Serviccs Tar Netu'ork (GSTN), Worldmark l, Aerocity, Indira Gandhi Intl.Airport, New, Delhi, India - t l 0 ()17 and others. . Petitioner . . . Respondents ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri .lustice l'.Sum Koshy) Ileard Mr.K. P.Amarnath Reddy, Iearned counsel lor the petitioner and Mr.Dorninic F ernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel lor CBIC appearing on behalf of respondent No. l; Mr.1'.Chaitanya Kiran, learned Assistant Govemment Pleader representing Mr.Swaroop Oorilla, leamed Special Govemment Pleader for State Tax appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Mr.B.Mukharjee, leamed counsel reprcsenting Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, leamed Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf ol respondent No.
Perused the record
2
The pctitioner clainrs to have paid the otrl-'anding dues afler issuance ol the show cause notice during the pt'l cierlcy of the adjudication proceedings. but the order-in-o i-tinal datcd 03.09.2025 has irnposed the tax liability of Rs.i4,73, ,50/-. similar arnount ol penalty under Section 7aQ) of the Cent'r I Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and interest under Sectiott i 0 of the said Act amounting to Rs.2,0 I ,9711- relalable to the peli rd April and Scptember', 2024.'I'|re petitioncr had been rnaking c r respondence with the GSTN to perrnit it to file ar.r appeal with,r.r pre-deposit, as the outstanding tax dues had already been paid iLr d no case of penalty could be made out. However, in that proc :ss, time for filing the appeal expired. It is contended by the Ie r ned counsel lor the petitioner that the petitioner has good grour Is to explain the delay. But, the petitioner rnay not be compellec to tnake the pre-deposit of l0% against the penalty amount in he aforesaid circumstances.
Learned Senior Standing Counsel appear Ig for GS'IN submits that there is no power with the GSTN to e.( lnpt the pre- deposit for filing the appeal
Lcarned Assistant Govet'nment Plcader appearing for the State Tax also submits that the pre-deposit is a prerequisite for filing the appeal. Whetl'rer the deposit of tax during the adjudication proccedings could relievc thc petitioner ol the liability of penalty is a mattcr to be decided by the appellate authority only upon the appeal being filed rvith pre-deposit. The petitioner, thcretbrc, caunot clairr any exctnption fiorn making the pre-dcposit. I-carned Assistaut Covernltrent Pleader also submits that the petitioner mal be allowed liberry to approach the appellate authority witli an explanation fbr the delay within a stipulated period and take all such grounds of law and facts in its appeal. 5. ln the lacts and circumstances noted above, since there is no exemption lor any taxpayer fiorn rnaking pre-deposit while 1 filing the appeal under the GST regime, u'hether the liability of penalty or tax was rightly imposed or not would be the subject matter of appeal on merits, the same cannot be a ground to seek exemption from making the pre-deposit. However, since the l I petitioner had been in correspondence with the respondent
4 authorities on this issue and has rnissed the cut oft't lte fbr frline the appeal, we glant tiberty to the petitioner to ii : the appcal s'ithin a pcriod of two weeks rvith statutory depo:i :ncl a dcllr condonation application. Thc petitioner r-r-ray take al ;ucir grounds of law and lacts in the metno ol appcal as are l. ailable to it Ncedless to say, the appcllate nuthority u'otr lcl :onsider the qucstion of delay sympathctically taking into lLccortnt the albresaid lacts and circumstanccs and i{-he is satisll -' I on the point ol delay, proceed to decide thc appeal on merits I accordance u,ith law within a reasonable time, preferably. "ithin twclve rveeks lrom the date of receipt ofa copy of this or<lt r
The writ petition is accordingly disposed o I Consequently, rniscellaneous petitions pend irr ,. if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. //// The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN), w r K.BHAVANlsry4ryI AS:J STANT REGISTRAR \ --- ..\'+=:=-' lSECTION OFFICER I r ark 1, Aerocity, lndira {t To 1 Gandhi lnternational Airport, New Delhi, lndia-1 1003 2.TheAssistantCommissioner(StateTaxes),Mehdipatrim-llCircle,Charminar Division, HYderabad.
The Secretary to Govemment (Revenue) CT-l.l,.Corr nercial Taxes / State " ili o-!-pirti"6ni, sGie of ielang'ana' Secietariat, Hvd: abad'
The Secretary (Finance), Ministry of Finance' Uniorr of lndia' North Block' New Delhi-110 001 : : " " :: l" : :: : :, :y:::: : :"'"'":::::i', : :'"'"::,o P u c, l,*i,iH :n
::'::lf '
Two ccs to sRr swARoop ooRrLLA, speciar Government preader for State Tax, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] / ./ 8 O,rp CC to SRt N. BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Soticitor Generat of tndia / loPUCl
Two CD Copies N/P \4-
HIGH COURT DA'l'1D:0610212026 \,)' U I ./i * o * Dr PAT ORDER WP.NI t.3448 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE \I/RIT PETITION WI]'HOUT COSTS I cr.a "qoo ftp' I v- t 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.