Sapna Satish Agarwal vs. State Of Telangana - Telangana High Court, 08 June 2026

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Originat Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO:110920F 2026 [ 3488 ] .....PETITIONER Revenue Afzalgunj- Complex Between: AND opportunity of being heard, and issuing unsigned arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice sapna Satish Agarwar, wo s-atish Kumar Aganrvar, Aged about 62 years R/o Frat J5, Southpark Appartments, Nallagandla eypa"ss, Serlinlampaity, Lingampatti, R;nga Reddy District - 500 019. 1 2 :l{1_"f leftrOana, Represented by its principat Secretary, uepartment, CT, Secretariat, Hyderabad. :,Yl: "l Telangana, Rep by Assistant commissioner (ST) Mahrajganj Circle, Charminar Division Commercial Taxes iT Nampally, Hyderabad, SOOOOi. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Articre 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particurarry a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent authorities in passing the impugned show cause Notice and order without proper service of notices, without generating Document rdentification Number (DrN), without varid authorization of the person who ailegedry represented the petitioner, without providing a reasonabre communications, as illegal, l.A.NO:1 OF 2026 Petition Under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavil filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to set aside and quash the impugned order and if needed remanci the matter back to the Assessing Authority with a directron to provide the Petitioner a fair and reasonable opportunity to submit its reply, produce relevant documents' and explain the discrepancies mentioned in the notice, and thereafter pass a fresh order in accordance with law. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. SINGAREDDY ROHAN NAGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : G.P FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : M/s SWARooP ooRlLLA, SPECIAL GoVT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX

The Court made the following ORDER

|: -.Pd:.13-€E:W@ IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD THE CHIEF JUSTICE RIAPARESH KUMARSINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.l 1092 of2026 DATED: 08.06.2026 Sapna Satish Agarwal, Wo. Satish Kumar Agarwal ... Petitioner AND THE HON'BLE Between: ORDER: State of Telangana, Represented by its principal Secretary. f elenu.e Deparrment ( CT), Secretariat, Hyderabad & another .. Respondents None appears for the petitioner Heard Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Govemment pleader for State Tax, appeanng for the respondents. 3' In the present case, the show cause notice dated 30.0g.2023and the order-in-original dated 30.r2.2o23passed under Section 73 0f theTerangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 andcentrar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'the Act'), are under cha,enge. The instant writ petition has 2

2 -r- been filed on 06.04.2026. 'Ihe petitioner has taken a plea that the show cause notice and the impugned order-in-originai were merely uploaded under the additional notices tab o1'GSTIN Portal and were not communicated to it. The matter relates to tax period from July 201"7 to March,2018. Therefore, the matter is not belated. This Court may entertain the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner was not served with the show cause notice and not ,lware of the proceedings initiated by the Department' Moreover' the impugned order was merely uploaded on the additional notices tab of GSTIN I'ortal. As such. it rvas not in the notice of the petitioner' 4, Learned Gol,emment Pleader for State Tax has opposed the prayer at the outset on the grouncl of huge delay in preferring this writ petition' He has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Clourt in Assistant Commissioner (CT) t'I U' Kakinada' v' Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer llealth Care Limitedt'

Having regard to the facts and circumstances as noted above' this Court is not inclined ttl enter into the merits of the issue' However' the approach the appellate authority with a delay pelitioner is at libertY to cotldonatioll aPPlicatron in of the Act with statutorY tetms of Section 10?(1) read with Sub-Section (4) pre-cieposit' lt is open fclr the peritioner to take all r ,rrtOr 19 SCC 68i

-.._,i r-tr-.ir:6:-i,_r"r.-r?-.;:t 1 3 such grounds in law and on facts in the appeal. Needless to say, the appellate authority, if is satisfied with the reasons explained in the delay condonation application, he shall proceed to decide the case on merits.

The instant Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. .C. DEEPIKA //II AS STANT REGISTRA To CTION OFFICER Il:^^l:::,ryt,s:"r".t"ry, Revenue Department, r etangana at Hyderabad. ecretariat, State of 2 The Assistant Commissioner (STJ, Afzalgunj_MahraJganj Circle, Charminar il::,H,::Iffirciar raxes ci i;,pdiil#r"ii, s"" or reransana at Iff":rn13r?)FoR REVENUE, Hish court for the state of retansana at One CC ro SRt STNGARED_D_Y ROHAN NAG| REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl one cc ro M/s swARoop^.ooCll;:"#i;;I'bo* ,,_.ooER FoR :TAT_E_TAX, Advocate tOpUCl Lv'^r- L Two CD Copies J 4 5 b. SA BS 9W

HIGH COURT DATED: 08/06/2026 ORDER WP.No.11092 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE W,P WITHOUT COSTS. (0puq, r{{6i At Tf or\ (' \ p 6 ,l U J I -',. t- C \.; 1 c DF :\ lt T 02 C) L ,t * L616l>L o LJ