Allowed

M/s Adani-Elbit Advanced Systems India Limited, v. Union of India

Telangana HC1 Apr 2026WP/34685/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition challenging the dismissal of an appeal under the GST Act without a hearing. The Court held that the appellate authority breached Section 107(8) by dismissing the appeal without an opportunity of hearing. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and remitted for a fresh hearing, while the underlying GST appeal was found time-barred.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order-in-appeal dated 21.08.2025 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the appellate authority to pass a fresh order after granting an opportunity of hearing.

M/s Adani-Elbit Advanced Systems India Limited, Vs… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[³⁴⁸⁸ I rN THE HIGH COUR-rJ9_B_rl!!.:-srArE^{oF TELANGANA} : AT HYDERABAD ' ,; (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

I .. ...

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST^{DAY OF APRIL-} nryo^{THoUSANDAND TWENTY SIX}

¶4

. PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF^{JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMARSINGH}

¶6

Between:

¶7

M/s Adani-Elbit Advanced^{Systems lndia Limited,having..itsregistered office} ai +tn Fbor, Apama Creit,^{Road No 2, Banjarahills,} ffyOeiiUaA,- tedngqna, 500034^{GSTIN36AAPCA0455K1ZG} -S-ecunderabad,^throughits Dileaoi l#mesh K.S,Sio^{Shivappa,Age 53 yegrs, RUg.fOlA,lstJVlainRoad,} Foomafir,agna Layout, Bangalor6'Soutli,^{Banishankari lll Stage, Bangalore} - . AND

¶8

1. Union of lndia, North Block, New Delhi 2. The Additional GST Commissionerate^GST Bhawan, LB Stadium - 500004

¶9

1. The Commissioner, CGST, GST Commissionerate 7th Floor, GST Bhavan, ium Basheerbagh ,^{Hyderabad- 500004}

¶10

...RESPONDENTS

¶11

petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to

¶12

(i) issuance of a writ in the^{nature of Certiorari or any other writ for} quashing the impugned MO^{(AnnexureP-6) passedby RespondentNo'} 2 under Section 73 of the^{Central GST/ Telangana GST Act and OIA} dated 21t08t2o25^{(Annexure P-12) passed by RespondentNo.3.}

¶13

(ii) For issuanry of appropriate^{wriUorder or directionto the appropriate} authority for fresh consideration^{of the present case on merits.}

¶14

(iii) For issuance of any other appropriate^{wriUorder or direction which this} Honourable Court may deem^{fit and proper in the circumstancesof the} case.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2:025

¶16

Petitiorr under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in :':"'1:' :1:: '^' 'ⁱ the affidavit liled in support of the petition,',,the' High Gourt Tay be pleased to Suspend the impugned Order in Original No-isg/G STt2O23-24-Adjn.(ADC) HYD.,,'' GST 28l0312(t05 passed by Respondent No, 2, and also Order in Appeal No.Hyd. _ L!ii: . ::t; .: .. . GST-HYC-AP P 1 -COM MR. -41 -2025-26 dated'21 10812025 passed by Respondent No. 3, pendin,g disposal of this Writ Petition,^: '

¶17

.,...

¶18

counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PAWAN ARORA FoR sRl MYI-A sRlHARt Counsel for the Respondent No.l: SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUW counser ror rhe Respondent Nos.2 - r:3k'i"Jl3[u*=ot==tii31l3]t=o sc FoR cBtc

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

AT EYDERABAD

run^gox'u,B IIm crrrnr lorsucD^{slu attutBsgxurnaursnvcn} ANI)

¶24

TIIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHTT'DDIN

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.34685^{of 2025}

¶26

Dated: 01.04.2026

¶27

Between:

¶28

IWs. Adani-Elbit Advanced Systems^{India Limited.}

¶29

...Petitioner

¶30

and

¶31

Union of India" Through Finance Secretary, North Block, New Delhi, and2 others.

¶32

...Respondents

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

Learned counsel Sri Pawan^{Arora, representing learnedcounsel}

¶35

Sri Myla Srihari, appears for the^petitioner.

¶36

Sri D.Raghavendar Rao,^{learnedSenior StandingCounsel for}

¶37

Central Board of Indirect Taxes^{and Customs(CBIC), appears for}

¶38

respondents No.2 and 3.

I I

ll
.)

lhe^{present writpetition isdirectdd againstthe} order-irr-original^{dated28.03.2024 passedby respondentNo'2 and the} order-irr-appeal^{dated 21.08.2025passedby respondentNo,3.}

¶45

'[he order-in-appeal has been challenged on the^{groundthat no} opporttrnity^{of personal hearingwas grantedin teeth of Section107(3)} of the Central^{Goods and ServicesTax Act,2017(hereinafter referredto} as,^,,thr) Act").^{The operative part of the impugnedotd"t-in-uppealis}

¶46

extract:d hereunder

¶47

,.6. [n view of the^{above, I proceed to decidethe appgal without} gianting the^{personal hearingto the appellantin as much} 3q'^the Iubmisiions^{that are goingto be madeby the appellan! during the} personal hearing, ur"^{,r-otgoing to alter the facts of the case with r€gad} to limitation

¶48

ORDER:

¶49

The appeal is^{dismissedas time-barred'"}

¶50

A counrer aftidavit^{has been filed by the respondents.}

¶51

Learned Senior^{StandingCounsel for CBIC submits that the} appeai was filed^{rvith a delay of 242 days. However, in ttre writ petition,} the pe,titioner has^{soughtto recomputethe delay and takena different} ground.

¶52

¶53

Section 107(8) of the AcJ reads as under:

¶54

*147. Appeals to Appellate Authority.-

¶55

xxx

¶56

The Appellate Authority shall give an opportunity to the appellant of being heard."

¶57

\ \

¶58

The language of the above provision shows that opportunity of hearing is mandatory in view of expression "shall" used in it. The appellate authority in his wisdom however chose to dismiss the appeal without granting any opportumty of hearing to the petitioner. The :' i . - )^" ,.t approach of the appellate authority is thtrefore in breach of the above statutory provision.

¶59

Be that as it may, since no opportqtrg of hearing has been granted before dismissal of the appeal on grounds of delay, in teeth of Section 107(8) of the Act, it is not necessary for us to go into the period of delay or the explanation to be furnished by the petitioner before the appellate authority. It is open for the petitioner to explain the delay befbre the appellate authority who may consider the same.

¶60

However, only on account of infraction of the statutory procedure prescribed under Section 107(8) of the Act, the impugned order-inappeal is set aside. The matter is remitted to the appellate authority to

¶61

¶62

Ir1

¶63

pass a fresh order in accordance with law after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶64

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of. There shall

¶65

be no order as to costs.

¶66

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/.

//TRUE COPY//

PSK. TKS #+,-

HIGH COURT

DATED i01l04l2026

. ,,, .. ,-]., :. "r- . ,1 , ."^,,,

¶75

ORDER

¶76

WP.No.34685 of 2025

¶77

rI HE s
,o
u 2 4 APn 2026
q-
&

TCH

¶78

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶79

$"'-

M/s Adani-Elbit Advanced Systems India Limited, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Adani-Elbit Advanced Systems India Limited, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Btl Logistics Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes

Veeravalli Srinivasa Rao Vs The Deputy State Tax Officer

Smt.Allam Rajitha Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Lingareddy Venkata Subba Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Telangana State Level Police Recruitment Board Vs Polampelli Raju

K.Anil Kumar Goud, Vs P. Venugopal Goud