Establo Infra Vs Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax (Telangana High Court)
Telangana High Court Permits Appeal Against GST Order and Directs Consideration of Delay Condonation
Summary: The Telangana High Court disposed of Establo Infra’s writ petition challenging the order-in-original dated 20.01.2025 and Form GST DRC-13 dated 02.02.2026. During the proceedings, the petitioner sought liberty to challenge the order-in-original through the appellate remedy, submitting that some delay might have occurred in approaching the appellate authority and requesting sympathetic consideration of the delay. The CBIC Senior Standing Counsel stated that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal on all available legal and factual grounds concerning the subject tax period. The High Court declined to examine the merits of the parties’ contentions because the petitioner sought to pursue the appellate remedy. The Court accordingly granted liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within two weeks, accompanied by the statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The petitioner was permitted to raise all available grounds of law and fact. The appellate authority was directed to consider the question of delay in light of the stated facts and circumstances and, if satisfied regarding the delay, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. During the two-week period available for filing the appeal, the Court directed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned garnishee notice. The writ petition was disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and without an order as to costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Mr. M. Naga Deepak, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appears for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The writ petition has been preferred challenging the order-in- original dated 20.0 1.2025 along with Form GST DRC-13 dated 02.02.2026.
3. However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order-in-original. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in approaching the appellate authority and therefore, he may be directed to consider it sympathetically.
4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the order-in-original taking all the grounds as are available in law and on facts before the appellate authority in respect of the subject tax period.
5. 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.
6. We grant liberty to the petitioner to prefer and appeal within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The petitioner may take all such grounds of law and 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 aforesaid facts and circumstances and if he 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 the appeal, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned garnishee notice.
7. 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.
