M/S Deccan Brakes Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

WP/1353/2026HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01002235202619 January 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Deccan Brakes Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging two orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Malkajgiri - 3 Circle. The first order, dated 30.04.2024, was an order of rejection of an application for rectification. The second order, dated 04.11.2025, was the order of rejection itself. The petitioner's application for rectification was made after 11 months, exceeding the six-month period stipulated by Section 161 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The matter pertains to the Financial Year 2019-20. The petitioner sought to declare the impugned orders illegal and arbitrary and sought a direction to prevent the collection of tax, penalty, and interest. An interim direction to stay the collection of disputed tax and penalty of Rs. 8,54,458 was also sought.

Held

The Court noted that the application for rectification was made after 11 months, which is beyond the six-month period prescribed by Section 161 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The order rejecting this application was challenged by the petitioner. The State Tax counsel submitted that the proper remedy for the petitioner was to prefer an appeal. The Court, without going into the merits of the case, directed the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order within two weeks, subject to statutory deposit, if any. The appellate authority was directed to consider the appeal in accordance with law. The Court explicitly stated that it had not gone into the merits of the case of the parties. The writ petition was disposed of on this basis.

Key Issues

1. Whether the application for rectification filed after 11 months, beyond the six-month period prescribed under Section 161 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was maintainable? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner implicitly argues that the orders rejecting the rectification application were illegal and arbitrary, suggesting that the delay should have been condoned or that the rejection was procedurally flawed. The petitioner sought to set aside these orders. Respondents' Contention: The State Tax counsel submitted that the proper remedy for the petitioner is to prefer an appeal against the impugned order.

Sections Cited

Section 161

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[ 3488 l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 1353 OF 2026 Between: ...PETITIONER AND M/s Deccan Brakes Private Limited, Represented by its prop. _.Thalluri Neelakanta Manikya Prasad S/o Charles Theophilus Thalluri 65 1"' main road, Vayupuri, Malkajgiri, Malkajgiri District, Telangana - 500094 1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Malkajgiri - 3 Circle. Malkajgiri Division, Hyderabad 2. The State of Department Telangana, Represented by Principal secretary, Revenue Secretariat, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS r- I Petition under Article 226 of the Constitytion of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamuS to declaring the Order dated 3010412024 in reference number 2D361125013601Y and order dated 0411112025 inreference number 2D361125013601Y passed by the first respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and also contrary to the principles of natural justice and set aside the same, consequently direct the 1st respondent not to collect any tax and penalty, interest ! I lA NO: 1OF 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 grant interim direction to stay of collection of the disputed tax and penalty of Rs. 8,54,458, penalty and interest pending disposal of this main writ petition Counselfor the Petitioner: SRl. K. VENKATESWARA RAO REp SRI SRINU PAMARTHI Counselfor the Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX

The Gourt made the following: ORDER

t , IN THE HIGH COURT FOIT THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTTCE SRI APARESH KUMAIT STNGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No. l3 of 2026 DATED .01.2026 Betu,een: M/s. Deccan Brakes Private Linrited Petitioner ANI) The Assistant Commissioner (ST)' Malkajgiri - 3 Circle, Malkajgiri Division' Hyderabad and another ... Rcspondents ORDER: Sri Venkateswara Rao K, learled counsel appears for Sri Srinu Pamarthi, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appears for respondents.

The application for rectification of the order dated 30.04.2024 made after 1l months i.e., beyond six months period as per Section 161 of Central Goods and Services Tax \ Act,2017, was rejected vide order of rejection of application $ t for rectification on 04. I I .2025. The matter pertairls to \

2 i{CJ (.AKrS, J) & CMM, J ir,i.P.No. 1353 of 2026 Financial Year 20rg-r9. The petitioner has assaired it in the instant Writ Petition 3. f-lowever, learned counsel for the State Tax submits that the proper renredy for the petitioner is to prefer an appeal. 4. z\ request for adiournmert has been made on beharf of the petitioner. Flowever, we are of the view that the petitioner may prefer an appeal against the impugned order withi, a period ol'two (2) weeks with statutory deposit, if any. If an appeal is preferred within such period, the appeilate authority would consider it in accordance with law. Let it be rnade clear tlrat we have not gone into the merits of the case of the parties. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed or. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shail stand closed ^i'{',[r1ilfl'$Iligf;xI //II SECTION OFFTCER 5 \l\ r To, ] Ifi4:Bs:,n',commissioner (sr), Malkajsiri- 3 circre. Matkajgiri Division, 6 ,*: rsir ,iF ,romlt mgi1em,l}?ff :ffi

Two CCs to Court for the 5. Two CD Copres BM .I PMK ("ofu -'i-- I I I - *-rd ,,,c{i ' ;.hil€l 6 /

HIGH COURT DATED:19/01 12026 ORDER WP.No.1353 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS le,a I I 202fi rt8 3t

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.