M/S. Magnus Technologies INDIA Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes)

Held

The Court held that the appellate authority committed an error in not considering the petitioner's application for condonation of delay while rejecting the appeal as being filed beyond the three-month period prescribed under Section 107(4) of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court noted that the appellate authority quoted Section 107 but failed to take into account sub-section (4), which allows for a further period of one month for filing the appeal if the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause. The Court found that the petitioner had submitted an application for condonation of delay, and a screenshot indicated its acknowledgment within 30 days. Therefore, the impugned appellate order dated July 19, 2025, was set aside. The matter was remitted to the appellate authority to pass a fresh order on the application for condonation of delay. If the delay is condoned, the appellate authority is directed to proceed to hear the appeal on its merits. The issue regarding the validity of the show cause notice and order-in-original was not expressly decided as the appeal was remitted.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Magnus Technologies India Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice and an order dated August 19, 2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes) for the tax period April 2019 to March 2020. The petitioner also challenged an appeal order dated July 19, 2025, passed by the Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST). The primary contention was that the show cause notice and the order-in-original lacked signatures and were issued without jurisdiction, violating provisions of the CGST and Telangana GST Acts and Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules. The appeal was filed against the order-in-original, but the appellate authority rejected it for being filed beyond three months, despite an application for condonation of delay.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned show cause notice and order-in-original dated August 19, 2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes) are illegal, without jurisdiction, and void for want of signatures and non-compliance with Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Telangana GST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the appellate order dated July 19, 2025, passed by the Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST) is illegal and perverse for rejecting the petitioner's appeal as being filed beyond the prescribed time, without properly considering the application for condonation of delay under Section 107(4) of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the initial notices and orders were procedurally flawed due to the absence of signatures and non-compliance with Rule 142(1A). They further contended that the appellate authority erred in rejecting their appeal without adequately considering their application for condonation of delay, despite the existence of a screenshot showing acknowledgment of receipt of the application within 30 days. They relied on Section 107(4) of the Telangana GST Act, 2017, which allows for condonation of delay. Respondents' Arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents regarding the merits of the initial notices or the appeal rejection. The focus of the hearing was on the appellate authority's decision regarding the condonation of delay.