M/S Shiva Associates vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APAR.ESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.28944 OF 2026 (CNR No.HBHC0 t 0597 412026) Dated:07.09.2026 Bctween: M/s. Shiva Associates, Rep. by its Proprietor Sri M.Jyothi Murthy, S/o. M. Bade Saheb and The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Rajendra Nagar-1, Saroor Nagar Division, Saroor Nagar, Hyderabad and 4 others OR.DER: Heard Mr ...Respondents K. Rajasekhar, leamed counsel representing ... Petitioner Ms. M. Bhargavi, leamed counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K. Sai Akarsh, learned Assistant Govemment Pleader appearing for State Tax and Mr. D. Raghavendar Rao, leamed Senior Standing Counsel appearing for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (cBrc).
The Writ Petition has been preferred with the following prayer: '... to issue an appropriate writ. order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the impugned proceedings issued by the I't Respondenl in Attachment to Form CST DRC-07 dated Nil for the period 2018-19 and the consequential recovery proceedings including Form GST DRc-og/attachment proce€dings dated 25-O'l -2026 of the 2'd Respondent received through gmail from ackvgd@tgct.gov.in, whereby a demand has been sought to be recovered liom the Petitioner for the tax
- 2 periods 2018-19. 2019-20 and 2020-21 without there being any effective communication of the adjudication proceedings i.e., aftachment to Form GST DRC-07 and without affording the Petirioner a meaningful and slatutory opportunit / of filrng objections and being heard as also passed the inrpugned order and consequential proceedings without affixtng or assigning any signature t,f the proper olficer as illegal, arbitrary. unJust. improper, without authority c,f law and luri iction. and also contrary to the provisions of the GST Act ,^ 0l 7 as also in contravention to the judgements of tligh Coun and the subjec mattcr of the issue belore the Hon'ble Supreme Court as also violative olarticles 14, l9(lXg).21.265, 300A ofConstitution of lndia and consequen Iy set aside the same and pass such other order(s) as this tlon'ble Cou( ma) deem flr and proper rn the interesr oljusrice.'
The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that it has come to knorv about the alleged demand only when recovery proceedings w(:re initiated and a recovery communication/notice was received through gmail on 25.07.2026. 4. However, after some arguments, leamed counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to rhe petitioner to preler an appeal against the impugned order. He submits rhat some delay might have been occurred in approaching the appellate authority and therefore, the appellate authority may be clirected to consider the appeal sympatheticall)
Leamed Assistant Government Pleader for State -fax submits that the petition3r is at Iiberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order taking all the grounds as are available to it in law and on facts before the appellate authority in respect of the subject tax period.
- 3
However, upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer an appeal, we do not wish to comment on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties.
Therefore, we grant liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The petitioner may take all such grounds of law and on facts in the memo of appeal as are available to it. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the question of delay taking into account the aforesaid facts and circumstances and if it is satisfied on the point of delay, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. . M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANTREGISTBAR //II \ sEc/oN oFFrcER The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Rajendra Nagar -1 Saroor Nagar Division Saroor Nagar Hyderabad. To 1 t
The Commissioner of State Tax, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate HNo 2- 3-908 Sai Balaji Arcade Cooperative Bank Colony Bandlaguda Road Nagole Hyderabad 500068. 3. The Central Board Of lndirect Taxes And Customs, Department of Revenue Ministry of Finance Government of lndia North Block New Delhi 1 10001 .
The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Commercial Taxes) Department Telangana Secretariat State of Telangana at Hyderabad Telangana.
The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance 4th Floor A Wing Shastri Bhawan New Delhi I 10001 .
One CC to Ms. MALA BHARGAVI, Advocate [OPUC]
E:is+-.it:!*Eg!7 7. one cC to SFil D.RAGHAVEN?TA RAO (SR SC FoR CBIC) topucl
ONE CC tO SRI KSAI AKARSH, AGi_APPENNIruC rON STATE TAX (oPUC)
One CC to SRt N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEpUTy SOL|C|TOR GENERAL OF tNDtA (OPUC) 10.Two CD Copies SA TKS
HIGH COURT DATED: 0710912026 ORDER WP.No.28944 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. l: j\. ( }} ,> 'I 6 I' s tt\ .nt { P + DES @ 1 laI
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.