BharatTaxGST

K Malaxmi Infra Ventures INDIA Private Limited vs. The Appellate Joint Commissioner Of State Tax

Original PDF →
WP/17241/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01035288202615 June 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN8 pages
For Petitioner: SRI P V PRASAD REPRESENTING, MS P.V. PRASAD ASSOCIATES, counserf ortheRespont"rH.?Xl:g0i?::3"#htesrArErAx

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
t 34881 rN rHE HIGH couRIffllDTlEAT#E oF TELANGANA (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) . "l^?3i,1&11il'i'tJ i Rfi ,"'l J'y-' PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND rHE HoNouRnaLr sniiiJSTlcE G'M' MoHluDDlN RIT PETITION NO: 'l.72410F 2026 Between: K Mataxmi tnfra Ventures lndia Private Limited Survey No .151 yll:]l Courtyard Golconda p*i""'rirt'i'g'J' Village -Hvderabad Telangana Represented By lts Directoi vinii 3*Z n"a Krishna irasad Aged 45 Years s/o V Trimurthulu Rlo. H''r'rl-o-zes Prajay Sai Gardens Ramalayam Xr.or"prrii. r.rugirr. Medchal Malkajgiri Telangana - 500 083 ...PETITIONER AND '1 . The Appellate Joint Commissioner of State Tax' Hyderabad Rural Division' Sth Floor C.T. Complex , Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana 2. The State Tax Officer, IVladhapur-Vll Circle Madhapur Division' Nampally Hyderabad, Telangana 3. The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department C.T. Complex Nampally, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS Petitron under Afticle 2?A of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issued by the Respondent No. I as arbitrary illegal without jurisdiction void violative of the principles of natural justice and principles of Judicial discipline apart from being violative of Articles 1a 19(|g)and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and to consequently set aside the same and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case The Rectificatiort rejection Order Ref No. 2D3612250715748 daled 19.12.2025 issued by -_-- the Respondent No. 1 as arbitrary illegal without jurisdiction void violative of the principles of natural justice and principles of Judicial discipline apart from being vicrlative of Articles 14 191 g and 265 of the constitution of lndia and to consequenfly set aside the same. t.A.NO:'l 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 pteased direct respondents not to take any further steps pursuant to the order in Form DRC-07 bearing Ref No 2D360225071103T dated 24.02.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2 t.A. NO: 2 0F 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 stay the operation of Order in Form APL-04 bearing Ref No 2D360326054406E dated 23.03.2026 rssued by the Respondent No. 1. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P V PRASAD REPRESENTING MS P.V. PRASAD ASSOCIATES counserf ortheRespont"rH.?Xl:g0i?::3"#htesrArErAx

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THI] HIGH COUR I },'OR Ht. s r.\ t E otr TEt-.\NGA-\.\ AT HYDF,R \BAT) WRIT PETITION No.l724l ol'2026 Dated:15.06.2026 Between: K.Malaxmi Infra Ventures (lndia) Private Lirnited. . .. Petitioner and The Appellate Joint Commissioner ol State .l ax. Hyderabad Rural I)ivision. 5'h Floor, C. f .Cornplex. Nampally, Hyderabad. 1'elangana 500 00 I . and 2 others. ...Respondents ORDER: Heard learned counsel Sri P.\'enkat Prasad. represr-nting M/s. P.V.Prasad Associates. appearing fbr the petitioncr and Sri Swaroop Oorilla. Iearned Special Gor crnrlcnr Plcadcr for Stare l-ax. appearing for the respondents.

2.

Based on the shor.v cause notice issued lor the tax period April 2020 to March 202 I on 28.1 I.2024, the order_ in-original r.r.as passe<i on THE HON'BLE THE C}II[ F JUSTICI SI(I ^PARI.]S}I KUMAR SII{GII A\D THE HON'Bl,E SRI J trS'l'I(ltl G.NI.\tOH I t, DDIN

l 21.022025 confirnring the dcrnand. The petitioner filed a rectification application under Scction I6l of'the Central Coods and Services Tax Act. 2017'Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter ref-erred to as. "tlre Act") on I8.04.2025 fbr correction of certain errors. The order on the rectification application was passed only on 19.12.2025 ^ but the petitioner. realising that no effective orders are being passed on the rcctiflcation application, also preferred an appeal under Section 107 ol- the Act against the order daled 24.02.2025 with pre-deposit and a delal' condonation application on 05.09.2025. The pctitioncr took a nunrbcr ol' grounds in the delay condonation application. I lou er er. it is submitted that its Chartered Accountant inadvertentll' failed to rnention the pendency of the rectification application. based on uhich the delay caused during the pendency of the delal' condonation application could have been excluded under Section l4 ol the Lirnitation Act. 1963. The appellate authority, in the above circurnstances. disrnissed the appeal by the impugned order dated 23.1)3.2026 as being time-barred. Being aggriered, the petitioner has approached this court ',lith a pra.n-er lbr restoration of the appeal, so that it can take rhe aclclitronal ground of pendencl of the rectification application to explain the delaf in approaching the appellate authority'

3.

The petitioner has relied upon the decision oi the lJigh Court ol Judicature at Allahabad in Prakash Medical Stores v. Ijnion of Indiar in support of its plea.

4.

Learned Special Governrnent Plcadcr 1br Statc-l'ax appearing lbr the respondents submits that though thc legal position is undisputed as far as the application ol Section l4 ol the I. irnitation Act is conce rned. but the impugned order cannot bc faulted sincc no such ground was taken in the delay condonation application.

5.

Learned counsel lor the petitione r" hor,r,ever. subrnits that if the matter is remanded to the appellatc authorit). thc pctitioner ',rould be in a position to take the ground olpendencl olthe rcctification application Otherwise. the impugned order of the appcllatc authorit)' confirming the order- in-original u'hich irnposed substantial liabilitl oltax. interest and penalty under Section 73 olthe Act r.voulcl be onerolls and unjustilied.

6.

We have considered the subrnissions ol thc learned counsel for the parties and the garnut of the lilnited lircts and circumstances noted abol'e '(2026) 38 Centax 190 (All.)

-l 1 It appears that the pctitioner has sullered on account of the l-ault ol the Chartered Accountarrt as he failed to take the available ground oi pendeno' ol tho rectillcation application 10 cxplain the delay ln approaching the appellatc authoritl . The delav condonation application shous a nunrber ol grounds taken on rnerits and also relies upon the decisions ol the Apex Court. however. rendered in a ditferent context, but conspicuousli lirlls short ol ret-erring to the ground olpendency of the rectiflcation application. rihich could have constituted sufficient cause tbr condoning the delal ol'95 days in pref'erring the appeal. 8. ln the a{bresaicl fircts and circumstances. rve are ol the view that il the rratter is rernanclcd to thc appellate authority rvith liberty to the petitioncr to takc the additional ground of'pendency ol rectification application to cxplain the dclal . interest ol.lusticc would be sub-served. Other* ise. thc petitioner. due to thult of its Chartered Accountant, rvt,uld unnecessarill sLrflcr the tax. interest and penaltl confirrned up to the appellate auth()rit)

9.

In these circunrstances. the impugned order in appeal dated 23.03.2026 is set aside . I he rnatter is renritted to the appellate authority to take a decision firr liesh consideration on the question of condonation of delal and. il' satist'icd. thercupon to pass a lresh order on merits.

a To, weeks from today

10.

The writ petition is accordingll disposed oL There shall be no order as to costs Miscell.aneous applications pending' it'an1' shall stand closed .N. CHANDRA SEKHAR ASSIST REGISTRAR //// ON OFFICER

1.

The App'ellate Joint Cemmissioner of State Tax, Hyderabad Rural Division 5th Floor C.T. Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana.

2.

The State Tax Officer, Madhapur-Vll Circle Madhapur Division Nampally Hyderabad Telangana

3.

The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary Commercial Taxes Department C T. Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad

4.

One CC to M/S P V PRASAD ASSOCIATES, Advocate [OPUC] 5 Two CCs to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX ,High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad. [OUT]

6.

Two CD Copies DAN BS Since the matter is remitted to the appellate authority. the petitioner is permitted to take additional grounds as abovc' w'ithin a'period ol two 1r-

HIGH COURT DATED: 1510612026 ORDER, WP.No.17241 of 2026 afi"i s I4 o t)t 0 I JUL 2026 PATCH t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT GOSTS t 6 la"t .,,<\ i N a& \

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.