Telangana High Court’s liberal stance on delayed GST appeals when writ remedy is first invoked

Overview of the decision

The Telangana High Court in M/s. S F F Engineers v. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax & Customs has once again underscored its consistent approach in Goods and Services Tax litigation. The Court permitted the assessee, who had initially invoked writ jurisdiction against an adjudication order, to withdraw the writ and pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act despite a delay, subject to fulfillment of statutory conditions and a proper explanation for such delay.

The order dated 18.02.2026 reflects a calibrated balance: while the Court insists that assessees ordinarily exhaust the statutory appeal mechanism, it is also prepared to ensure that bona fide resort to writ proceedings does not permanently foreclose the appellate route on limitation grounds.

Factual matrix and procedural history

Orders challenged before the High Court

The writ petition was filed by M/s. S F F Engineers against the following:

  • Order-in-Original dated 15.04.2024, and
  • Summary Order in FORM GST DRC-07 dated 02.05.2024,

both issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the FY 2018-19. These orders imposed demand of tax along with penalty.

At the stage of hearing, however, counsel for the assessee changed course and opted not to press the writ petition on its merits. Instead, the assessee sought:

  1. Liberty to avail the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act; and
  2. A direction that the Appellate Authority consider the delay with empathy, since a portion of the statutory limitation period had been consumed in pursuing the writ petition before the High Court.

Stand of the revenue

Counsel representing the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) did not oppose the assessee’s right to file an appeal. It was stated that the assessee is free to assail the Order-in-Original and the DRC-07 summary before the Appellate Authority, taking all factual and legal grounds available under law for the relevant tax period.

Key findings and directions of the Telangana High Court

No adjudication on merits when appellate remedy is pursued

The Division Bench comprising Aparesh Kumar Singh and G.M. Mohiuddin clearly noted that since the assessee had now chosen to invoke the appellate remedy, the Court would refrain from delving into the merits of the controversy. This is in keeping with the general principle that writ jurisdiction is not ordinarily exercised where an effective statutory remedy is available and is being pursued.

Conditional liberty to file delayed appeal

The Court structured its relief in a conditional manner:

  • The assessee was directed to file an appeal within two weeks from the date of the order;
  • The appeal must be filed along with the prescribed statutory pre-deposit; and
  • A delay condonation application must accompany the appeal.

The Bench further directed that the Appellate Authority:

  • Shall decide the appeal in accordance with law;
  • Shall take into account that the assessee had been diligently pursuing the writ remedy in the interim;
  • Shall leave open all legal and factual grounds for the assessee to urge before the appellate forum; and
  • May entertain the appeal on merits if the authority is satisfied that the delay has been satisfactorily explained.

With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of, without any order as to costs.

1. Reinforcement of the rule of alternate remedy

This decision is another addition to the growing body of Telangana High Court jurisprudence that: