Writ Withdrawn, CESTAT Route Opened: Telangana High Court Steers Assessee Toward Statutory Remedy
Case Overview: Dyarapogu Kurumaiah Vs Additional Commissioner
The Telangana High Court recently delivered a procedurally significant ruling in Dyarapogu Kurumaiah Vs Additional Commissioner, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate (Writ Petition No. 9054 of 2026), offering meaningful guidance on the hierarchy of legal remedies available to assessees who find themselves locked out of appellate forums due to limitation issues. The judgment, while not touching upon the substantive merits of the tax demand, carves out a functional path for assessees who have lost their appeal window but still have a genuine grievance to pursue.
Background of the Dispute
The assessee, Dyarapogu Kurumaiah, had moved the High Court challenging two orders — an Order-in-Original No. 234/2020-Adjn(ADC) ST dated 30.03.2022 passed by the first respondent, and an Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-SVTAX-RR-AP2-113/2024-25 dated 12.06.2024 passed by the second respondent.
The crux of the assessee's grievance was straightforward: the appellate authority had dismissed his appeal strictly on limitation grounds, without engaging with his substantive submission that he had never received the Show Cause Notice nor the Order-in-Original within the prescribed time. The assessee contended that this non-service of notice was the very reason behind the delay in filing his appeal, and that rejecting the appeal without considering this explanation amounted to a denial of a fair hearing.
Aggrieved by both the original order and its dismissal in appeal on technical grounds, the assessee approached the High Court seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash both orders and set aside the consequential demand and recovery notices.
The Relief Sought Before the High Court
The writ petition prayed for the following relief (reproduced as in the original judgment):
"For the aforesaid reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Certiorari to quash the Order-in-Original No.234/2020-Adjn(ADC) ST dated 30.03.2022 passed by Respondent No.1 as violative of principles of natural justice, unjust and failure to exercise discretion judiciously, along with all consequential notice/s / demand notice and set aside the Order-in-Appeal No.HYD-SVTAX-RR-AP2-113/2024-25 dated 12.06.2024 passed by Respondent No.2 rejecting the appeal filed by Petitioner on grounds of limitation without considering the submission regarding non-service of the Show Cause Notice and non receipt of the Order-in-Original by the Petitioner in time and pass such order or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and grant such other relief as it deems in the circumstances of the case."
Legal Framework: Sections 85 and 86 of the Finance Act, 1994
A critical aspect of the court's reasoning rested on the statutory appellate framework governing service tax disputes. The court noted that the order-in-appeal had been passed under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, and that an order passed under this provision is expressly appealable before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) under Section 86 of the same Act.
This statutory architecture is significant because it reflects the legislative intent to provide a specialized, dedicated appellate forum for disputes of this nature — a forum equipped with the expertise and jurisdiction to examine both procedural infirmities and substantive tax demands. The availability of this statutory remedy is a well-recognized ground for High Courts to decline entertaining writ petitions at the outset.