Krishna Automotives Hyderabad Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (Telangana High Court)
Telangana HC Waives 10% Pre-Deposit for GSTAT Appeal Where Tax Was Already Paid Under IGST
The Telangana High Court disposed of a writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) under Section 112 of the CGST Act on or before 31.07.2026 without insisting on the statutory pre-deposit of 10% tax. The parties agreed that the writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P. No. 3600 of 2024 dated 22.02.2024. The petitioner submitted that, in its own earlier case, the High Court had held that no 10% pre-deposit was required as the tax had already been paid under the IGST Act. The dispute concerned whether the supplies were inter-State or intra-State, with the authorities holding that CGST and SGST were payable instead of the IGST already paid. The Court observed that the dispute did not relate to excess availment of Input Tax Credit and permitted the petitioner to raise all grounds of law and fact before the GSTAT. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and disposed of the writ petition without costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Mr. P. Venkat Prasad, learned counsel representing M/s. P.V. Prasad and Associates, appears for the petitioner.
Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader appears for State Tax.
2. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties reached to a consensus. It is agreed that this writ petition may be disposed of in terms of order passed in W.P.No.3600 of 2024, dated 22.02.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the petitioner’s own case earlier while relegating it to the remedy of appeal before the first appellate authority under Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the CGST Act”), the coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 02.05.2025 in Review I.A.No.3 of 2025 in W.P.No.32722 of 2024 had held that the petitioner will not be required to deposit 10% tax as per the statutory requirement while preferring the appeal. This was in the light of the fact that the petitioner had already deposited the tax under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the IGST Act”).
4. The issue involved was whether the supplies were interstate or intra-state supplies.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the show cause notice was adjudicated upon by the proper officer, who held the petitioner liable to pay the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) and State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) of the same amount of tax paid through Integrated Goods and Services Tax on the basis of supply i.e., Rs.5,46,69,458/- for the financial year 2019-2020. There is no issue of excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) as held by the original authority and upheld in the appeal also. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that while preferring an appeal before the second appellate authority under Section 112 of the CGST Act, the requirement of predeposit of 10% tax may not be insisted upon. He has also referred to the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Infiniti Retail Limited vs. Union of India1
6. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the findings recorded in the impugned order-in-appeal that the tax liability upon the petitioner lies under CGST and SGST on the basis of supply instead of IGST, which the petitioner had wrongly paid, the present dispute does not lie on any excess availment of ITC by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner will have the liberty to file an appeal before the learned Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) on or before 31.07.2026, which is the extended time period for preferring such appeal, taking all such grounds of law and fact available to it. While preferring the appeal, petitioner will not be required to deposit 10% tax as per the statutory requirement. Needless to say, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Note:
1 (2025) 31 Centax 162 (Del.)
