Dilip Super Market Vs Superintendent of Central Tax (Telangana High Court)
Telangana High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging GST Assessment Due to Unexplained Delay; Reiterates Importance of Statutory Appeal Remedy
The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a GST assessment order and consequential recovery proceedings on the ground of unexplained delay in approaching the Court. The Court reiterated that where a statutory appellate remedy is available, taxpayers must act within the prescribed limitation period and cannot bypass the appellate mechanism without sufficient justification.
Introduction
In Anil Kumar Agarwal v. Deputy Commissioner (ST) & Others, the petitioner challenged an assessment order passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 along with the corresponding Form GST DRC-07 and subsequent bank attachment proceedings.
The petitioner contended that the DRC-07 summary order was invalid as it was allegedly unsigned and therefore contrary to Rule 142 of the CGST Rules, 2017. However, the Telangana High Court declined to entertain the writ petition due to the petitioner’s failure to explain the substantial delay in challenging the assessment order.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner challenged:
- Order-in-Original No. 05/2024-25-GST dated 22.04.2024 passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017.
- Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.04.2024 issued pursuant to the assessment order.
- Bank attachment proceedings dated 21.03.2025 initiated under Section 79 of the CGST Act.
The writ petition was filed on 28.03.2025, nearly eleven months after the assessment order was passed.
Petitioner’s Contentions
The petitioner argued that:
