Kota Saree Bhandar vs. Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Kota Saree Bhandar, approached the Telangana High Court challenging an Order in Original and proceedings in Form GST DRC-07, along with a Show Cause Notice in Form DRC-01. These were issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) under Section 73 of the GST Act for the tax period 2020-21. The petitioner contended that these notices and orders were a nullity, issued in violation of natural justice and unsustainable on merits. The petitioner claimed ignorance of the proceedings due to their tax consultant's failure to inform them, only becoming aware after engaging a new consultant. The impugned order was dated 22.02.2025, and the Show Cause Notice was dated 17.05.2024.
Held
The Court did not delve into the merits of the contentions raised by either party. Instead, acknowledging the petitioner's request to prefer an appeal, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order within two weeks. This appeal was to be accompanied by a statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The Court directed that the appellate authority should consider the explanation for the delay sympathetically and, if satisfied, proceed to decide the appeal on its merits in accordance with the law. The Court explicitly stated that it did not wish to comment on the merits of the case. The Writ Petition was disposed of with this liberty granted to the petitioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned notices and order issued under Section 73 of the GST Act for the tax period 2020-21 are a nullity due to alleged violations of the principles of natural justice and being unsustainable on merits? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned notices and order were nullities because they were issued in violation of the principles of natural justice and were unsustainable on merits. They also claimed to have been unaware of the proceedings due to their tax consultant's negligence. Revenue's Contention: The revenue submitted that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order, taking all available grounds of law and fact before the appellate authority.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD The Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Anaresh Kumar Sinsh and The Hon'ble Sri Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddv Writ Petition No.30881 of 2026 (CNR No. H 8HC010627332026) Dated:18.09.2026 Belween: Kota Saree Bhandar Rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Prayeen Chand Agarwal S/o late Shri Mamchand Agarwal. and Assistant Com m issioner (ST) Goshamahal Circle, Colconda Division, Room No.204,2"d Floor, Hermitage Office Complex, Hill Fort Road, Adarsh Nagar, Hyderabad - 500004 and 3 others Order: ...Petitioner .,.Respondents Mr. Rahul Sharma, learned counsel represents Ms. Akruti Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appears for respondents No.l and 2. 2. This Writ Petition is filed for the following relief: '-to issue a Writ of Mandatrus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction set asrde the Order in Original along with proceedings in Form GST DRC-07 vide Ref. No. 2D3602250654594 dared 22.02.2025 and Show Cause Notice along with Form DRC-01 darecl l?.05.2024 issued by the I" Respondent under Sectron 7l of rhc Act fbr the tax period 2020-21 as being nullity on the ground that rhe impugned notices and orders are issued in violation of princrples of natural justice and also unsustainable on merits and pass such ofier order or ordgrs as the Hon'ble Court may deem flt and proper in the circumstances of the case."
)
The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that its accounts and GST compliances are being handled by the tax consultant, who failed to inform the petitioner about the irnpugned proceedings and only after a new tax consultant r.,"as engaged, petitioner came to know about the same
Florveve r, after some arguments, leamed counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in approaching the appellate authority and therefore, he may be directed to consider it sympathetically.
Learned Assistant Govelnment Pleader for State l'ax subrnits that the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order taking all the grounds as are available to it in larv and on facts belore the appellate authority in respect of the subject tax period
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the panies, since the petitioner seeks liberly to prefer an appeal, we do not wish to comment on the rnerits of the contentions raised by the panies
Horvever, u'e grant liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay
3 condonation application. The petitioner may take all such grounds of law and facts in the memo of appeal as are available to it. Needless to say, the appellate authority would take into account the explanation for delay and if it is satisfied on the poinr ofdelay, proceed to decide
the appeal on merits in accordance with law.
The Writ Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications. if any pending, shall stand closed. P. PRAMOD NAIK ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// t. :\, To, sEcrls/fi oFFtcER
The Assistant commissioner (ST), Goshamahar circre, Gorconda Division, Room No. 204,2nd Floor, Hermitage Office Complex, Hi Fort Road, Adarsh Nagar, Hyderabad 500 004
The Chief Secretary, and Special Chief Secretary to Government (FAC,;. State Tax Department Secretaria.t, Hyderabad, State cf Tetangana.
The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Jeevan Deep Building, 3.1d Floor, Sansad [\ilarg, New Delhi-1 10 001
The commissioner (GST), centrar Board of rndirect raxes and customs, GST Policy Wing, Government of lndia, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi_
One CC to SRl. AKRUTI GOYAL, Advocate tOpUCl
Two ccs to the Swaroop oorila, speciar Govt preader for state Tax, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]
Two CD Copies PSR GJP
HIGH COURT DATED: 1810912026 ORDER WP.No.30881 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PEITITON WITHOUT COSTS. Nl1- t_ .5 aa +,. (,) O. ( 3 ' SEP 2P6 ('!'zt. i. t'l \:\ ,6,.ti:.?-.14:; :::J=" >elql>e
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.