##PAGE1##

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.9279 of 2026

Dated: 31.03.2026

Between:

Sai Srinivasa Pharmacy …Petitioner

and

The Superintendent, Office of the Superintendent, Mancherial Circle,

H.No.1/1-2, Bypass Road, Mancherial – 504 208, and 2 others.

…Respondents

ORDER:

Learned counsel Sri Gajanand Chakravarthy, representing learned

counsel Sri Upadhyay Raghavender, appears for the petitioner through

video conferencing.

2

Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for

Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, appears for respondents

No.1 and 2.

2. The Goods and Services Tax (GST) Registration Certificate of the petitioner bearing No.36ABYPN9134H1ZY was cancelled vide Order for Cancellation of Registration passed in Form GST REG-19 dated 12.08.2025 for non-filing of returns as contemplated under Section 29(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner filed an application for revocation of cancellation of registration on 27.08.2025. A show cause notice was issued on 09.09.2025. The consultant of the petitioner failed to inform about issuance of the show cause notice and neglected the matter. Thereafter, the order dated 23.09.2025 was passed rejecting the application for revocation of cancellation on the ground that the petitioner had not replied to the show cause notice within the stipulated time. Therefore,

the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court.

3. It is submitted that if the petitioner is allowed one more opportunity to explain the grounds taken in the show cause notice on its

3

application for revocation of cancellation of registration, the petitioner

would be able to satisfy the competent authority.

4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 submits that the application for revocation of cancellation of registration was rejected on the ground of non-filing of the reply within the stipulated period. He submits that this Court may in such circumstances pass appropriate

orders.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances noted hereinabove and that the petitioner’s application for revocation of cancellation of registration was rejected apparently for non-filing of reply to the notice dated 09.09.2025, the impugned order dated 23.09.2025 rejecting the application for revocation of cancellation filed by the petitioner is set aside. The matter is remanded to the competent authority, who shall give an opportunity to the petitioner to file reply to the show cause notice dated 09.09.2025 and decide the application filed by the petitioner for revocation of cancellation of registration in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of filing reply by

the petitioner.

4

6. The instant Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall

be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

______________________________________

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ

______________________________________

G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J

31.03.2026 KL