M/S. Shubham Sales Corporation vs. Assistant Commissioner (St)

WP/3379/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01005726202606 February 2026Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA6 pages

For Respondent: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Shubham Sales Corporation, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice dated June 10, 2024, and an order dated August 31, 2024, along with a rectification order dated December 31, 2025, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Malakpet-II Circle. The challenge also extended to an appeal order dated December 27, 2025, passed by the Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST). The tax period in question is April 2019 to March 2020. The petitioner contended that the impugned notices and orders were illegal, perverse, barred by time, and passed without proper verification and signatures, violating provisions of the CGST Act, 2017, and Telangana GST Act, 2017, and non-compliance with Rule 142(1A).

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition primarily on the ground that the show cause notice dated June 10, 2024, was barred by limitation. The Court noted that for the tax period April 2019 to March 2020, the extended period of limitation, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, was up to May 11, 2024. The show cause notice was issued on June 10, 2024, which was beyond this extended period. The learned Special Government Pleader conceded this fact. The Court relied on a previous judgment of a Division Bench of the same High Court in WP.No.119 of 2025 decided on January 20, 2025. Consequently, the impugned show cause notice and all consequent proceedings were set aside and quashed. The Court did not specifically address the issue of the notice being unsigned or passed without verification, as the petition was decided on the limitation ground.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notice dated June 10, 2024, issued for the tax period April 2019 to March 2020, is barred by limitation under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, considering the extension of limitation due to the COVID-19 pandemic? 2. Whether the show cause notice and subsequent proceedings are illegal due to being unsigned and passed without proper verification of records? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was barred by limitation. They also contended that the notice was unsigned and passed highhandedly without verifying records, making it illegal and void. The petitioner relied on the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017, Telangana GST Act, 2017, and Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017. Respondents' Arguments: The learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax conceded that the show cause notice was barred by limitation.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Rule 142(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

13447 1 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 3379 OF 2026 Between: AND 1 M/s. Shubham Sales Corporation, rep. by its Proprietor, Mr. Bajrang Kumar Fitkiriwala, 233, 1st Floor, Shubham Sales Corporation, Sri Krupa Market, Malakpet, Hyderabad, Telangana-500 036. I i i lr ...PETITIONER Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad. (ST), Malakpet-ll Circle, Charminar Division, 2. Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3. State of Telangana, rep. by its Secretary to Government (Revenue), State Tax / Commercial Taxes Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articte 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction by setting aside the impugned show cause notice daled 10.6.2024 along with the notice in Form GST DRC-01 vide Ref.No.2O3606240222615 dated 10.06.2O24, and the impugned order dated 31.8.2024, along with proceedings in Form GST DRC-07 vide Ref .No.2D3608241539722 dated 31.8.2024 and the rectification order dated 31 .12.2025 issued by the 1' Respondent for the tax period April, 2019 to March, 2020, as illegal, perverse, barred by time and are passed highhandedly without verifying the records and without having any signatures as illegal and contrary to the provisions under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act,.2017 and the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 , and void in absence of non-compliance of Rule 142 ( 1 A) =-i=! ' .(-7 of the central Goods and Service Tax Rules, zo17 and re langana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and consequently set aside th,> appsal order dated 27.12.2025 passed by the 2nd Respondent for the tax oerio I 2019_20. lA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High cor r may be pleased to grant stay of all fu(her proceedings pursuant to the in I ugned order dated 31 .8.2024 along with proceeding in Form G I I DRC_OZ vide Ref.No.2D3608241539722 dated 3'1 .8.2024 issued by th€ 1st Respondent for the tax period April. 2019 to March, 2o2o under the centrz I Gootis and Service Tax Act, 2o17 and the Terangana Goods and Services Ta: Act, 2017 pending disposal of the writ Petition as otherwise the petitioner wi t: put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI K.p.AMARNATH REDDy Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL. GP FOR STATE TAX

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGII COURT FOR THE STA'I'E OF Tf,LAN(}ANA AT HYDER4BAD THE HONOURAI]LE SRI .IT'STICE P.SAM KOSHY ,\Nt) THE TIONOURABLE SITI JT STICE NARSING II.AO NANI)IKoND'\ WP.No.3179 of 2O26 l)a tc:06.02.2026 Retween: Ws.Shubham Sale s Corporation.H,"*dcrabad ... l)etirioner And Assistant Commissioner 1S l 1- Malakpet-ll Circlc. Channinar Dir ision' Ill derabad and othcrs' . . . I{cspondcrlts ORDER: fuer Hon bte Sri .htsrka P San Kosh.t') Heard Mr.K.P.Amamath Reddy, learncd counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Srvaroop Oorilla, leamcd Special Govemment Pleader for State 1 ax. appearing on bchalf of the respondents and perused the record

Aggrieved by the shon'-cause notice dated l0'06'2024 along with notice in Form GST DRC-01, the present writ petition l-ras been filed.

The chaltenge is prin.rarill on tu'o grounds' Firstly' the notice being barred by linritation and secondly, the notice being an unsigned one. However, considering the fact that the first ground raised is that ol 1he show cause notice being barred by limitation,

2 \.,'c \vcire collstraincd to look into the material datc's s.r Iir as to test \iarch. 1010. lhe rronnal period of iirnitation und: . thc statute in ''i ir.'the r sht-.'r -cau-st' notice in f act w,as barred bv lirr i rLtion or not. l-irc i,r.. pcriocl iuvoirrij in the instaltt casc ii ,\pr il 2019 to iirc ;r1ssgl11 case is up to 31.12.2020. I{ou'evcr', I tcrnrse of' the sLrbscqucnt ,-roliflcation issued by the Departrnent ir hc light ol the r. or ici- i 9 pandenric that the Country has faccrl. ttte lteriod of iin:itation \\ as extended and lor the period April 2 ) l9 to March, li)]0. the r.,riendeci period ol lirnitation was ui) c 11.05.2024 iu the instunt casc. the show-cause notice has he:n issued and assaiieci in tirc present writ petition is one which ,r,as issued on 10 0().1021. ,.vhich is apparently beyond the exlcr dcd period of iin r iiution (',- I I.05.2024- i. Giver tl.re aloresaid admitted factual malr. of the case, learrted Spccial Covemment Pleader concedes, r,e are ol the considered opinion that the impugned shorv.cause notice is;;cr- .sc barrei b1, lirnitation in terms of the notili,: .tion issued by ihe icspondcnts. l'he view of this Bench stands fo: tified with the I

3 To, judgment of Division Bench of this Cor.rrt in WP.No.l 19 of 2025 decided on 20.01.2025. 6. thc Writ Petition to thc atoresaicl exte nt dese t'r es to be and accordingly allorr cd. Thc itnptrgned sl-toir -catlse notice and the consequent proceeding stand sct asidc anci hcrebl' quasired. Thcre shalt be no order as to costs Miscellaneous applications pe nding, il any. s[.rall stand closed .A. H.S,GOWRI SHAN SISTANT REG R ///i ECTION OFFICER

The Assistant Commissioner (ST)' Malakpet-ll HYderabad.

The Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST)' Punjagutta sion, Hyderabad

The Secretary to Government (Revenue), State Tax / Commercial Taxes Department, Secretariat, HYderabad, State of Telangana Circl , Charminar Division,

One CC to SRI K P'AMARNATH REDDY' Advocate [OPUCI ' IN:*?3..il: 3,:1"'"Yff ?35":,?Tih'ffiL'tot?,'o * SrArE rAX' H ish

Two CD CoPies BSR W I I i ! i

HIGH COURT DATED: 0610212026 o() SIA 2 I [13 ?{lit 7zc) j., ORDER WP.No.3379 of 2026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS * i: F,AT ,€b q g "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.