Disposed

M/s Sri Sai Krupa traders v. The state of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Apr 2026WP/9689/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST assessment orders for FY 2017-18 and 2018-19 were challenged for lack of personal hearing and portal glitches hiding show cause notices. The court declined to entertain the belated FY 2017-18 challenge but granted liberty to file appeals with delay condonation applications and statutory pre-deposit for the FY 2018-19 orders.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file statutory appeals for FY 2018-19 orders within two weeks with delay condonation application and pre-deposit; appellate authority may condone delay and decide on merits.

M/s Sri Sai Krupa traders Vs The state of Telangana — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[³⁴⁸⁸ I

¶2

lN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELAI'IGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE^{SECONDDAYOF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY SIX}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{THECHIEF JUSTICE SRIAPARESH KUMAR SINGH} AND THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN}

¶6

WRIT PETITION^{NO:9689 OF 2026}

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s Sri sai Krupa^{traders,rep, by its. proprietor, VishnuVqrdlaqReddy} k'iiLonOiJocateiO aiig-2i6,^{M'iinRoad,'beiide^B-haratpetrolBunk; Toopran} vittige anti Mandat,^{Medakdistricl, Telangana-502334'}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 . The state of^{Telangana, ReP: by its Principal secretary,Revenue(cT)} Department, Secrdtariat,^{Hyderabad-Telangana'}

¶12

The commissioner^{of state Tax, CT complex, Nampally, Hyderabad.}

¶13

The Assistant^{Commissioner (ST),Sanga Reddy-1 Circle, Nizamabad} Division.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

petition .under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith, the High Court} -may^be pleased to issue a writ,^{more particularlyin the nature of certiorariA. lssue an} appropriate writ,^{order, or direction,moreparticularty a writ of certiorari,calling} fdi tn'e records^{pertaining to the three impugned,assessmentorders dated} 2s 12202s (FY 1t-14^{S6sr and CGST, 2s.04-2o24(FY 18--19SGST and} ccsiiano )o.o+.zozq^{(FY 18-19 lcsT)passed} Py 1f,"^{Respondent N9. 3 and} quash the same ,r Olinb^{illegal, arbitraiy,and violativeof principlesof natural} - the Respondent No. 3 in initiating : ;i,iii"",^{B. Dectare that- thJ'actionof} i"o"LdOi.gs^{on iOentiiif grounds, despite having d.rgnge!sirylal proceedings} for earlier financial^{years,is arbitraryandunsustainablein law, C' Consequently'} restrain the ResponOent^{No. S from initiating any coercive recovery proceedings} pursuant to the imPugned^orders.

¶16

lA NO: 1 0F 2026

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying thatⁱⁿ the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the HighCourt may be pleased to} suspend the notice in Form DRC-07 Payment^{Reminderdated 21.02.2026} pending cisposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶18

lA NO: 2 t)F 2026

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High. Court may be pleased to} stay the operations of impugned orders^{dated 29.12:2023 (FY 17-18SGST and} QGST), 2'.9.04.2024^(FY 1S-19 SGST and^{CGST) and 26.04.2024(FY 18-19} IGST) P:rssed by the Respondent^{No.3 pending disposal of the above Writ} Petition.

¶20

Counseltbr the Petitioner: SRI J.V.^{AMRUTH PRASAD}

¶21

Counsel lor the Respondents: SRI^{SWAROOPOORILLA,SPL. GP for State Tax}

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

i i I t. I l.

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶25

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR STNGH

¶26

AND

¶27

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MqHIUDDIN

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.9689 of 2026

¶29

Dated: 02.04.2026

¶30

Between:

¶31

IWs. Sri Sai Krupa Traders

¶32

.Petitioner

¶33

and

¶34

'['he State ot' Telangana,

¶35

Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad - Telangana, 'and2 others.

¶36

Respondents

¶37

ORDER:

¶38

l.earned counsel Sri J.V.Amnrth Prasad appears for the petitioner.

¶39

Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for

¶40

State Tax, appears for the respondents.

¶41

/ /

¶42

¶43

In the present case, the assessment orders dated 29.12.2023 (financial year 2017-18 SGST & CGST).29.04.2024 (f,rnancial year 2018-11) SGST & CGST) and 26.04.2024 (financial year 2018-19 IGST) passed by respondent No.3 are under challenge. The writ petition has been filed on 31.03.2026.

¶44

l'he petitioner has taken a plea that it was prevented from responding to the show cause notices due to technical glitches in the GST portal, as the notices were uploaded in the "Additional Notices" tab which^',vas not visible during regular login session. The respondents failed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and the imp'ugned orders are passed without considering the petitioner's request for extension of time to veri& the discrepancies. The matter relates to financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19. Therefore, the matter is not belated. This Court may entertain the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded the opportunity of personal hearing.

¶45

L,earned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has opposed the prayer, at the outset, on the ground of huge delay in prefening this writ petition. He has relied upon the decision of

¶46

¶47

\ \

¶48

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada, v. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limitedl.

¶49

¶50

Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal with a delay condonation application in terms of Section 107(l) read with Section 107(4) of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act,20lTlCentral Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He submits that the appellate authority may be directed to consider the question of delay sympathetically in view of the reasons explained in the delay condonation application.

¶51

Since the challenge to the proceedings for the financial year 2017-2018 is grossly belated, we are not inclined to entertain the challenge thereo.

¶52

However, the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the appellate authority as regards the orders dated 29.04.2024 and 26.04.2024 for the financial year 2018-19. The petitioner may approach the appellate authority within a period of two weeks with a delay condonation application and statutory pre-deposit. It is open for the petitioner to take all such grounds in law and on facts in the appeal. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the question of '(zozo)^{19 scc681}

¶53

¶54

¶55

delay arrd if he is satisfied with the reasons explained in the delay

¶56

condonation application, he shall decide the case on merits

¶57