Y.V.G. Narayana Vs Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax (Telangana High Court)
Telangana High Court Grants Liberty to Taxpayer to File GST Appeal Against Order-in-Original; Protects Taxpayer from Coercive Recovery
Summary: The Telangana High Court dealt with a writ petition filed by M/s. Y.V.G. Narayana challenging a GST show cause notice dated 25.09.2023, Order-in-Original dated 21.03.2025, summary in Form GST DRC-07 dated 24.03.2025 and garnishee notice in Form GST DRC-13 dated 04.06.2026. The petitioner stated that it became aware of the liability only upon issuance of the garnishee notice and sought liberty to avail the statutory appellate remedy. The Telangana High Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the parties’ contentions and granted liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application, permitting all available grounds of law and fact to be raised. The appellate authority was directed to consider the question of delay and, if satisfied with the explanation, decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. During the two-week period granted for filing the appeal, the Court directed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned garnishee notice. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of without costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Learned counsel Sri Srinarayan Toshniwal appears for the petitioner.
Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appears for respondents No.1 and 2.
2. The writ petition has been preferred against the show cause notice dated 25.09.2023, order-in-original dated 21.03.2025, the summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 24.03.2025 and also the garnishee notice in Form GST DRC-13 dated 04.06.2026.
3. The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that it has come to know about the liability only upon the issuance of the garnishee notice in Form GST DRC-13 dated 04.06.2026.
4. However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order-in-original. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in approaching the appellate authority and therefore, he may be directed to consider it sympathetically.
5. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the order-in-original and DRC-07 taking all the grounds as are available in law and on facts before the appellate authority in respect of the subject tax period.
6. However, upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer an appeal, we do not wish to comment on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties.
7. We grant liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The petitioner may take all such grounds of law and facts in the memo of appeal as are available to it. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the question of delay taking into account the aforesaid facts and circumstances and if it is satisfied on the point of delay, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. During the period of two weeks within which the petitioner has to file the appeal, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned garnishee notice.
8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
