Tatikonda Satyanarayana Vs Superintendent of Central Tax and another (Telangana High Court)
In another important GST procedural relief matter, the Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to withdraw the writ petition and pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act despite delay in approaching the appellate authority.
The Court observed that since the petitioner had been bona fide pursuing remedy before the High Court, the appellate authority should consider the appeal without being adversely influenced by delay.
The ruling once again demonstrates the Telangana High Court’s practical approach in GST litigation by ensuring that procedural delays do not unnecessarily defeat statutory appellate remedies.
Case Background
Petitioner
Sri Tatikonda Satyanarayana
Respondents
- Superintendent of Central Tax
- Other departmental authorities
Facts of the Case
The petitioner challenged:
- Order-in-Original dated 19.09.2025
- Summary Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 23.09.2025
The impugned proceedings were passed under:
- Section 73 of the Central Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017
The department imposed:
- Tax liability of Rs.10,08,006/-
- Interest
- Penalty
Proceedings Before High Court
The petitioner initially approached the Telangana High Court directly through writ jurisdiction.
However, during the course of hearing:
- The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition and
- Requested liberty to approach the appellate authority under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act.
The petitioner further requested:
- Sympathetic consideration of delay while filing the statutory appeal.
Key Legal Issue
