GST Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad
Mandalaneni Srinivasarao v. Maa Engineering & Energy
APL NO. 2 (HYD) OF 2026
The ruling in brief
Where first appellate authority, by relying on equitable powers arising from Article 226 as well as from orders of High Courts, condoned delay in filing appeals against registration cancellation beyond statutorily permissible limit, such condonation was ultra vires as first appellate authority could not invoke constitutional relief.
Where Department restored registrations after respondents discharged tax dues and acted upon impugned appellate orders by permitting return filings and business resumption, subsequent appeals filed by Department against condonation were infructuous as operative relief was already effected; Department could not unsettle crystallised legal positions.
Where registration was cancelled for non-filing returns and portal barred delayed requests for revocation, respondents could validly pursue statutory appeal under Section 107, since inability to invoke Rule 23 revocation due to procedural restrictions did not extinguish right to challenge cancellation by way of appeal
Provisions considered
Section 107 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 107, read with sections 29 and 30, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 107, read with sections 29 and 30, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Rule 23 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017/Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.