Infosys BPM Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner of Central Tax (Telangana High Court)
Summary: Infosys BPM Ltd. approached the Telangana High Court challenging the recovery of a substantial GST refund amount and seeking an opportunity to pursue its statutory appeal against an order-in-appeal dated 30.04.2024. The petitioner had originally been sanctioned a refund of Rs. 19,47,35,590 by Form GST RFD-06 on 14.06.2023 for the period April 2021 to March 2022. According to the petitioner, the department preferred an appeal against the refund order, but the appeal was decided ex parte on 30.04.2024 without serving the petitioner with a copy of the appeal papers or the order-in-appeal.
The petitioner further stated that the order was not uploaded on the common portal and, consequently, it was unable to prefer an appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) within the prescribed period. Meanwhile, recovery proceedings were initiated through a show cause notice dated 25.02.2026 and proceedings dated 29.05.2026, including issuance of Form GST DRC-07. The petitioner submitted that when the writ petition was instituted, the applicable period for filing the GSTAT appeal had not expired and sought liberty to file the appeal within three weeks, together with a direction that any delay be considered in light of the pendency of the writ petition. The Revenue submitted that whether the order-in-appeal had been uploaded on the common portal was a matter requiring verification, but stated that the order could be supplied to the petitioner within a week if it approached the concerned authority.
The High Court, considering the limited grievance, directed the petitioner to make a formal manual application to the appellate authority for a copy of the order-in-appeal dated 30.04.2024. The authority was directed to provide the copy within one week. The Court further granted liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT within three weeks, along with the statutory pre-deposit and an application for condonation of delay. Importantly, the Court directed that if the appeal was filed within the permitted three-week period with the statutory pre-deposit prescribed under Section 112(8) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the impugned demand would remain in abeyance. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous applications were closed.
Background and Grievance
The petitioner had received a refund of Rs. 19,47,35,590 by Form GST RFD-06 dated 14.06.2023 for the period April 2021 to March 2022. The department subsequently preferred an appeal against the refund order, which, according to the petitioner, was decided ex parte on 30.04.2024 without service of the appeal papers or the order-in-appeal.
The petitioner contended that the order-in-appeal had neither been served upon it nor uploaded on the common portal and that this prevented it from exercising its statutory right of appeal before the GSTAT.
Submissions Before the High Court
Petitioner’s Submissions
The petitioner submitted that, when the writ petition was filed, the time available for preferring the statutory appeal had not expired. It therefore sought liberty to file an appeal before the GSTAT within three weeks and requested that any delay be considered by the Tribunal in view of the pendency of the writ proceedings. It also sought a copy of the order-in-appeal to enable it to pursue the statutory remedy.
Revenue’s Submissions
The learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submitted that whether the order-in-appeal had been uploaded on the common portal was a matter requiring verification. However, it was stated that, if the petitioner approached the concerned authority, a copy of the order would be made available within one week to enable the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
High Court’s Directions
The Telangana High Court directed the petitioner to make a formal manual application to the appellate authority by the following day seeking a copy of the order-in-appeal dated 30.04.2024. The appellate authority was directed to provide the copy within one week of receipt of the application.
The Court further granted liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT within three weeks from the date of the order, together with the statutory pre-deposit and an application seeking condonation of delay.
The Court specifically directed that, if the appeal was filed within the permitted three-week period with the statutory pre-deposit in accordance with Section 112(8) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the impugned demand would remain in abeyance.
Final Ruling
The writ petition was accordingly disposed of. There was no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were closed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Heard Mr. Ravi Raghavan, learned counsel representing Mr. Lakshmi Kumaran Sridharan, learned counsel for the petitioner, in virtual mode and Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is captured in the order dated 23.07.2026, which reads as under:
”The refund was sanctioned to a tune of Rs. 19,47,35,5901- by Form GST RFD-06 on 14.06.2023 pertaining to period April, 2021 to March, 2022 against which the department preferred an appeal. However, without serving any cop} of the appeal papers. the appeal was decided ex parte on 30.04.2024. copy of which has not yet been served upon the petitioner. Petitioner still has a rented} to prefer an appeal under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before the learned Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) and has been asking a copy of the order-in-appeal. Meanwhile, by proceedings in show cause notice dated 25.02.2026, the respondents have sought to recover the amount originally sanctioned by order-in-original dated 29.05.2026 along with Form GST DRC-07.”
3. The cut-off date for filing an appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, `GSTAT’) against an order-in-appeal, preferred during such period, was 31.07.2026, as per the Notification dated 30.06.2026 issued by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.
4. Petitioner’s refrain is that the order-in-appeal dated 30.04.2024 was neither served upon it nor uploaded on the common portal. Therefore, the petitioner has been precluded from preferring an appeal within the time prescribed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the instant Writ Petition was preferred, time limit for filing the appeal has not expired. Therefore, liberty be granted to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within a period of three weeks with an observation that the delay, if any, may be condoned by the GSTAT taking into account the pendency of the instant Writ Petition. He submits that a copy of the order-in-appeal may be made available to the petitioner for preferring the appeal.
6. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that though it is a matter of verification whether the order-in-appeal was uploaded in the common portal or not, if the petitioner approaches the authority concerned, the same would be made available within a week, so as to enable the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the Act’).
7. Having regard to the limited facts and the grievance placed by the petitioner, let the petitioner make a formal application manually by tomorrow to the appellate authority to provide a copy of the order-in-appeal dated 30.04.2024. On such application being made, let a copy of the order-in-appeal be provided to the petitioner within a period of one week. Petitioner is allowed liberty to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT within a period of three weeks from today with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. In case, the appeal is filed within the said period with statutory pre-deposit, as per the provisions of Section 112(8) of the Act, the impugned demand would be in abeyance.
8. The instant Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
