The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot 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 Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in passing the order dated 10/09/2025 bearing Ref. No. ZD36O92SO14O74H, ARN. AD3605250061468, by the 3rd respondent, as..illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and in.violation of the provisions of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the principles of natural justice, and set aside the same and consequenfly suspend the operation of the order dated 1OlO9l202S bearing Ref, No. 2D360925014074H, ARN. AD3605250061468, passed by the Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. i I i lA NO: 1 OF 2t025 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 direct the responderrts to stay of all further proceedings of the order dated lOtOgt2OzS bearing Ref: No. 2D360925014074H, ARN. AD300525006146B, passed by the Appellate Joirrt Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad, for recovery of the disputed tax, interest and penalty pursuant thereto, pending disposal of ther above write petition. counsel for the Petitioner: sRl MIRZA RASooL BAIG, REPRESENTING SRI RAVI G. Counsel for tJre Respondents: SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR STATE TAX The Court ma,Ce the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT TTYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THB CHIEF JUSTI CE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN Writ Petition No.29727 of 2025 Dated:29.12.2025 Between: IWs. Genmedic Health Care Private Limited ... Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and two others. ORDER: ... Respondents Learned counsel Sri Mirza Rasool Baig, representing learned counsel Sri Ravi.G, appears for the petitioner through video 1 \ conferencing. Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader f,or State Tax, appears for the respondents. 2 --

2. The matter was disposed of earlier on 17. 12.2025, but it has been listed today under the head "on being mentioned" to effect necessary correctiorrs in the order dated 17.12.2025. After hearing learned counsel for the ptrties, the present writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

3. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated

30.04.2024 passed by respondent No.'3, Assistant Commissioner (ST), Madhapur:, Hyderabad, has been rejected by respondent No.2, Appellate Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Hyderabad, vide order dated

10.09.2025 (Annexure P.7) on the ground that the appeal is time-barred.

4. The order in DRC-07 passed by respondent No.3 was on

30.04.2024. l'he proceedings relate to the Financial Year 2018-2019. The petitioner preferred the appeal on 07.05.2025 i.e., beyond the three months pt:riod flrom the date of communication of the order. However, the petitioner did not f,rle any application for condonation of delay on the bona fide impression that the appeal was filed within the limitation period. Under this misconception, the appeal was filed and heard on merits also, but it was rejected as being time-barred. Therefore, the petitioner has assailed the impugned order. l / i 3

5. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the appeal was filed beyond the period of three rnonths * one month up to which it can be condoned under Section 107(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Therefore, the appellate authority rejected the appeal. He submits that the petitioner \ \ may approach the learned Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as, "the Tribunal") as and when it is constituted \ \ with pre-deposit.

6. Upon consideration of the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that since the appeal has been rejected on the grounds of delay, the petitioner should prefer an appeal before the learned Tribunal as and when it is constituted with pre- deposit.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to deposit t0% of the tax liability as assessed by the Assessing Officer with the Department within four weeks from today. The petitioner shall approach the Tribunal within three months from the date of its constitution/establishment. The Tribunal shall decide the second appeal in accordance with law. Further, subject to depositing 10% of the tax liability within the aforesaid time, no coercive action be taken \ F against the petitioner till the decision o[ the Tribunal in the second appeal. [t is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merils of the case. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, ifany, shall stand closed. SD/-T. SRINIVASA REDDY ISTANT RE / To

1. The Pr ncipal Secreta . Secretariat, Hyderaba d. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER Commercial Taxes Depa ment, State of Telangana,

2. The l,ppellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Commt:rcial Tax Department, sth Floor, C.T. Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3. The A:;sistant Commissioner (ST), Madhapur-7 Circle, Madhapur Division, Hyderabad.

4. One CC to SRI RAVI G., Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to SRI SWAROOP OORILLA, Special Government Pleader for State Tax, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

6. Two Ct) Copies MP BS ?rtc.., HIGH COURT DATED i2911212025 ( Till: S E 2 t [: r i.i )f?fi ,.'..'.. * * ORDER WP.No.29727 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT GOSTS tul.l*