Bharadwaj Auto Tech Private Limited Vs Union of India and others (Telangana High Court)
Telangana High Court Declines Writ Petition, Directs Taxpayer to Approach GST Appellate Tribunal Under Section 112
The Telangana High Court declined to entertain a writ petition challenging the Order-in-Appeal dated 29.04.2025 passed in Appeal No. HYD-GST-MD-AP2-016-25-26. The Court observed that the petitioner had an available statutory remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before the GST Appellate Tribunal, which was stated to be functioning. The Court also noted that the impugned order had been passed on 29.04.2025, whereas the writ petition was filed only on 25.06.2026, approximately fourteen months later. It observed that if the petitioner intended to invoke writ jurisdiction, the petitioner ought to have approached the Court promptly instead of waiting for fourteen months. Reserving the petitioner’s right to avail the statutory appellate remedy before the Appellate Tribunal, the High Court disposed of the writ petition as not maintainable. No order as to costs was passed, and all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were directed to stand closed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Heard Mr.Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Ms.Mytri Indukuru, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5. Perused the record.
2. The instant is the writ petition, which has been filed assailing the Order-in-Appeal dated 29.04.2025 passed in Appeal No.HYD-GST-MD-AP2-016-25-26. At the outset, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition for the reason that as on date, the remedy of preferring an appeal against the order is available to the petitioner under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before the appellate Tribunal. We are told that the appellate Tribunal is also now functioning. The reason for taking the said stand is also for the reason that the impugned order which was one passed on 29.04.2025 and that the instant writ petition is one which has been filed only on 25.06.2026 i.e. after fourteen months from the date of impugned order is passed. The petitioner, if at all, had to avail the writ remedy, he ought to have approached the Court, promptly, rather than waiting for fourteen months and then trying their luck before the writ Court.
3. Reserving the right of the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal before the appellate Tribunal, the Writ Petition, at this juncture, stands disposed of as not maintainable. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
