Sahithi Marketers Vs Superintendent of Central Tax (Telangana High Court)
The Telangana High Court, in the case of Sahithi Marketers vs. Superintendent of Central Tax, declined to entertain a writ petition challenging a GST assessment order and its summary. The petitioner raised three main arguments: that the summary order (Form GST DRC-07) was time-barred, the original order lacked a legal basis, and the summary order had no physical or digital signature.
The respondent’s counsel countered these claims, stating the Order-in-Original was dated April 24, 2024, and was therefore within the extended limitation period of April 30, 2024. They also asserted that the order was issued under the correct legal provision (Section 73 of the GST Act) and that the summary order’s lack of a signature was not prejudicial as it was a summary of the valid, physically signed original order.
The court referenced the Supreme Court’s precedent in CCT v. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020). The Supreme Court had previously held that while High Courts have wide powers under Articles 226 and 227, they should not disregard statutory appeal periods. The court noted that a writ petition cannot be used to bypass the prescribed appeal process after the statutory and extended limitation periods have expired.
