IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No. 5111 of 2026 DATED : 19.02.2026 Between:

SITS COOLING SYSTEM PVT LTD … Petitioner AND The Deputy Commissioner (GST), Nacharam-II Circle, Saroornagar Division, Telangana, and four others … Respondents

ORDER:

Sri Jai Kishan Solanki, learned counsel appears for petitioner.

Sri K. Sai Akarsh, learned Assistant Government Pleader appears for Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. In the present case, the order dated 30.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’), and show cause notice dated 15.06.2022 are under challenge. The instant Writ Petition has been filed on

17.02.2026. The petitioner has taken a plea that it could not come to know of the impugned order as it was uploaded on the Additional Notices tab of GSTIN Portal only. The matter relates to Financial Year 2017-18. Therefore, the matter is not belated. This Court may entertain the Writ Petition on the ground that the petitioner was not served with the show cause notice and not aware of the proceedings initiated by the Department. Moreover, the impugned order was merely uploaded on the Additional Notices tab of GSTIN Portal. As such, it was not in the notice of the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax has opposed the prayer at the outset on the ground of huge delay in preferring this writ petition. He has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada v. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited, (2020) 19 SCC 681

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal with a delay condonation application in terms of Section 107(1) read with Section 107(4) of the Act. He submits that the appellate authority may be directed to consider the question of delay sympathetically in view of the reasons explained in the delay condonation application.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances as noted above, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the issue as the petitioner is being allowed liberty to approach the appellate authority. He may approach the appellate authority within a period of two (2) weeks with a delay condonation application and statutory pre-deposit. It is open for the petitioner to take all such grounds in law and on facts in the appeal. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the question of delay and if he is satisfied with the reasons explained in the delay condonation application, he shall decide the case on merits. 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.

6. The instant Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

____________________________

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ _____________________

G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J

19^th FEBRUARY, 2026.

kvni