KR Power Infra (India) Private Limited Vs Additional Commissioner (Central Tax) & Others (Telangana High Court)
Telangana High Court Grants Liberty to Challenge ₹5.93 Crore GST Demand and Restrains Coercive Recovery During Appeal Period
Summary: Telangana High Court permitted M/s. KR Power Infra (India) Private Limited to pursue its statutory appellate remedy against an Order-in-Original and FORM GST DRC-07 raising tax and penalty of ₹5,93,97,436 for FYs 2017-18 to 2022-23 under Section 74 of the CGST and TGST Acts. The petitioner had challenged the proceedings on several grounds, including jurisdiction, limitation, constitutional grounds and failure to appreciate voluntary payments allegedly made before issuance of the show-cause notice. During the hearing, however, the petitioner sought liberty to prefer an appeal and requested consideration of the delay in doing so. The High Court therefore refrained from commenting on the merits. It granted the petitioner two weeks to file an appeal with the statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application and permitted all available grounds of law and fact to be raised before the appellate authority. The appellate authority was directed to consider the delay in light of the facts and circumstances and, if satisfied, decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Importantly, the Court directed that during the two-week period available for filing the appeal, no coercive steps should be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned garnishee notice. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of without costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE TELANGANA HIGH COURT ORDER
Heard Mr. K.P. Amarnath Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Dominic Fenandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 14.
2. This writ petition is filed for the following relief:
“… to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order setting aside the Order-in-Original dated 15.1.2025 and the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 6.2.2025 as passed by the 1st Respondent levying tax and penalty in a sum of Rs.5,93,97,436/- for the years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, as Un-Constitutional, without Authority of Law, without jurisdiction, barred by limitation, legally unenforceable and contrary to multiple notifications and circulars as issued from time to time by the 3rd Respondent and orders/judgments of various Hon’ble Courts and apart from being violative of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders, as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case.”
3. The petitioner has challenged the impugned orders on many grounds, including that they were passed without appreciating the factual circumstances regarding the voluntary payments made by it before issuance of the show-cause notice.
4. However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned orders. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in preferring the appeal and therefore, the same may be directed to be considered sympathetically.
5. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned orders, taking all the grounds as are available to it in law and on facts.
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. Accordingly, 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 in law and on 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 facts and circumstances of the case 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 an 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. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
