Smart Choice Solutions Vs Deputy State Tax Officer (Telangana High Court)
Summary: Telangana High Court permitted M/s. Smart Choice Solutions to file a fresh application for revocation of cancellation of its GST registration after its earlier revocation application was rejected following failure to respond to the show cause notice. The petitioner explained that the reply could not be filed inadvertently because of a change of tax consultant. Its GST registration had been cancelled on 24.06.2025 through FORM GST REG-19, and the application for revocation was subsequently rejected on 28.04.2026. By then, the limitation period for filing an appeal had also expired. Considering the circumstances and the State Tax authorities’ submission that a fresh revocation application could be entertained, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Sri Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy granted the petitioner two weeks to file a fresh application manually before the competent authority. The authority was directed to consider the application in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the rejection of the earlier application on account of failure to file a reply. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of without costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Mr. V. Ganesh Bhurjanga Rao, learned counsel appears for the petitioner.
Mr. K. Sai Akarsh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for State lax appears for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.
2. The petitioner filed an application on05.04.2026 for revocation of cancellation of registration before the competent authority against the order for cancellation of registration dated 24.06.2025 (Annexure Pl) issued in FORM GST REG-19, to which a show cause notice was issued on 23.05.2025 (Annexure P3) pursuant to which the petitioner failed to file reply leading to rejection of the application for revocation of cancellation of registration vide ord.er dated 28.04.2026. By this time, the limitation for filing an appeal has also expired.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of the change of the Tax Consultant, the reply to the show cause notice could not be filed inadvertently. Therefore, one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner either to file reply to the show cause notice for fresh consideration of its application for revocation of cancellation of registration or to make a fresh application for revocation of cancellation of registration.
4. Learned counsel for the State Tax submits that the petitioner may be allowed to submit fresh application for revocation of cancellation of registration before the competent authority within a stipulated period which may be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.
5. Considering the submissions made by the leamed counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances and for the groundsstated in the writ affidavit, we deem it proper to give iiberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application for revocation of cancellation of registration before the competent authority within a period of two (2) weeks, manually. If such an application is filed, the competent authority would consider the same in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the rejection of the earlier application on ground of failure to file reply.
Accordingly, the instant Writ Petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions,, pending if any, stand closed.
