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.3914 of 2026 Dated: 11.03.2026 Between:

Mr. Dhantla Aadi Reddy Trade Name: M/s. Naganjaneya Traders D.No.5-143, Ground Floor, Railway Station Road, Mahabubnagar, Telangana-509001 ...Petitioner and Deputy State Tax Officer Mahabubnagar Circle, Nalgonda Division and 3 others ...Respondents

Order

Heard Mr. Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appearing for respondents No.1 to 3.

2. The impugned show cause notice in Form GST REG-17 dated 15.04.2025, issued under Rule 22(1) of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short ‘the Rules’), for cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner and the consequential order of cancellation of registration in Form GST REG-19 dated 14.05.2025, passed by respondent No.1 under Rule 22(3) of the Rules, are under challenge.

3. The petitioner has also challenged the appellate order dated 29.12.2025, whereby the order of cancellation of GST registration has been confirmed.

4. The primary ground of challenge to all these proceedings is absence of proper reasons in the show cause notice and in the order of cancellation and denial of opportunity of hearing by the appellate authority.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except stating that there is violation of Section 29(2)(e) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the GST Act’), in obtaining registration by fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts, no other supporting materials were enclosed to the show cause notice. Though a formal reply was not filed by the petitioner to the show cause notice, he had appeared before the proper officer and explained the reasons for amendment to the place of business. However, without considering the same, the impugned order was passed, only quoting the relevant provision of Section 29(2)(e) of the GST Act, without any findings. It is submitted that the appeal preferred against the impugned order was disposed of by seeking parawise remarks from the Deputy State Tax Officer, Mahabubnagar Circle, without notice to the petitioner, on the contents thereof. It is therefore in violation of the procedure prescribed under Section 29(2)(e) of the GST Act and the relevant Rules. Therefore, the petitioner has assailed the impugned proceedings.

6. Learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax submits, on instructions, that the impugned show cause and the impugned order of cancellation of registration of course does not reflect the findings on the basis of which the registration of the petitioner was cancelled and they only quote relevant provision of Section 29(2)(e) of the GST Act. He submits that the matter can be remanded to the proper officer, who would pass a fresh order, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances noted above and since it appears that the impugned show cause notice and the impugned order of cancellation of registration suffer from non-application of mind and are bereft of any reasons or findings, the same cannot be upheld in the eye of law. It further appears that the appellate authority has also asked for parawise remarks from Deputy State Tax Officer, Mahabubnagar Circle, on the appeal filed by the petitioner and the petitioner appeared on 19.09.2025, but the remarks obtained from the Deputy State Tax Officer, Mahabubnagar Circle, were not given to the petitioner to controvert the same.

8. In view of the above, the impugned show cause notice and the order of cancellation of registration dated 14.05.2025 and also the appellate order dated 29.12.2025 are set aside and the matter is remanded to the proper officer to pass a fresh order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this o