Klr Industries Limited Vs Joint Commissioner of Central tax

KLR lnduskies Llmited, Sy. No.22211, ECIL Post, Cherlapally, Hyderabad - 500062. Represented by its Whole Tlme Direclo1, Shri K. Mjaya Gxmi neOOy, S/o. K. Laxma Beddy, Aged 65 years, Rlo 21-2618, Mission^-Oompound, Shamshabad, K.V. Rangareddy, Telangana -5O1 21 8.

¶10

.....PETMONER

¶11

'1. Joint Commissioner of Central tax, (Appeals), 7th Floor, GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Easheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500001.

¶12

Superintendent of Central Tax and Central Excise , lGpra Range, Uppal CGST Division, 3-4-11812 NR, 2nd Floor, Elegant Edifice; Rarnanthapur, Hyderabad - 500013.

¶13

Union of lndia, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance Govemment of lndia, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep, Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110 001.

¶14

IIESIIOIIIIr:IITE

¶15

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that impugned order in Form ApL-02 bearing .. - reference no. 2D3607250458144 dated 3147-2025 passed by the Respondeflt No. 1 under the provisions of CGST/TGST Ac( 2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without^{jurisdiction,} violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitutkrn of lndia, and to consequently set aside the same.

¶16

|.A"NO:1 OF 2026

¶17

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 stay operation of impugned order in Form ApL-02 bearing reference no. Z,D36O725O458144 dated 31-07-2025 passed by the Respondent No.1 .

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s P.V.PRASAO ASSOCIATES

¶19

999Jl.19!l9rlhe^{Responitentt{os.i & 2 : M/s DOMIN|C FERNANDES (SENIOR} STANDING COUNSEL FOR CB!C)

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶21

The Court made the following ORDER

¶22

7

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TTIE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶24

TITE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.605 of 2026

¶27

DATED : 09.01.2026

¶28

Between:

¶29

KLR Industries Limited, rep., by its Whole Time Director Sri K. Vrjaya Laxmi Reddy, Sy:No.222 / l, ECIL Post, Cherlapally, Hyderabad.

¶30

Petitioner

¶31

AND

¶32

Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals), 7ft floor, GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hydeabad and 2 others.

¶33

... Respondents

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

sri P. venkata Prasad, learned counsel represents tws.^p.v.prasad

¶36

Associates, for the petitioner.

¶37

sri Dominic Fernandes, learned senior Standing counsel for the

¶38

Central Board of lndirect Taxes and Customs appears for respondent Nos.l and2.

¶39

.",

¶40

Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri N. Bhujanga Rao,

¶41

@

¶42

learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appears for respondent No.3.

¶43

2

¶44

2- Petitioner preferred the statutory appeal under Section r07 of the central Goods and Service Tax Act,2017, however, after a deray against the order-in-original dated fi.03.2024 before respondent No.l _ Joint Commission, Central Tax (Appeals).

¶45

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the stage of acknowledgement of submission of appeal, the appeal itself has been dismissed on 31.07.2025 indicating the reason of rejection of delay in submission of appeal. Rejection of appeat is to be contained in FORM GST APL 04, instead the impugned order was issued in FORM GST ApL 02' [t is submitted that the petitioner had preferred the appeal within the period of,45 days as per the liberty granted by this Court in a barch of rvrit petitions led by w.P.No.ll54 of 2024 and batch dated 02.01 .2025. para l2l of the said order has been referred to, which reads as under:

¶46

"These writ petitions are accordingly disposed of by reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail the iemedy of statutory appeal. If the appeal is preferred by the petitioners within a5 days !"9."^{the appellateauthority, the said authority shafl consider} and decide the appeal on merits and it shall not be tlrrown overboard on the ground of limitation. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the cases. There shall be no order as to costs. Misceflaneous petitions pending, if any, shalr stand closed.,,

¶47

3

¶48

Admittedly, the memorandum of appeal did not mention or enclose the aforesaid judgment of this Court. Therefore, the appellate authority may have dismissed it. He submits that since the appeal was filed within the period of 45 days as per order dated 02.01.2025 of this Court, the appellate authority may be directed to consider the appeal on merits in accordance with law.

¶49

1 \

¶50

Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the CGST has also reiterated the statement that the petitioner did not mention or enclose the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.No.l 154 of 2024 and batch. [t seems that the appellate authority therefore rejected it as time barred. He, however, submits that the matter may be remanded in the aforesaid circumstances to be considered on merits with a direction to the petitioner to file an application enclosing the judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.No.ll54 of 2024 and batch so that the appellate authority could consider the question of delay in the light of the direction passed in the said batch of cases.

¶51

Having regard to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and since the appeal was preferred within the window period of 45 days granted by this Court in W.P.No.1154 of 2024 and batch, the appeal did not deserve to be rejected on delay. The petitioner may not be allowed

¶52

4

¶53

to suffer for the inadvertence in not referring to the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.l 154 of 2024 and batch, as such, we feel inclined to set asidc the impugned rejection order dated 31.07.2025 which has been communicated in FORM GST APL 02. Petitioner's writ petition being W.p.No.l564g of 2024 was also part of the batch of the writ petitions decided by this Court vide judgment dated, 02.01.2025. Therefore, the impugned rejection order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the appellate authority to consider it in accordancc rvith law. Petitioner should file an application rnanually. if not permissible online, enclosing the copy of judgment dated 02.01.2025 passed in W.P.No.l 154 of 2024 and batch.

¶54

7 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶55

Misccllaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶56

SO/.K.MADHAVI ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶57

SECTION OFFICER

¶58

To 1. The Joint Commissioner of Central tax, (Appeal Floor, GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 1

¶59

1. The Superintendent of Centra I Tax and Central se, Kapra Range, Uppal CGST Division, 3-4-118[2 NR,2nd Floor, Elegant Edifice, Ramanthapur, Hydera bad - 500013.

¶60