Case Details: Bharat Kumar Agarwal vs. Joint Commissioner (AE) of Central Tax, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad (2026) 42 Centax 465 (Telangana)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
-
- Aparesh Kumar Singh, CJ. & G.M. Mohiuddin, J
- Ms Akruti Goyal, Learned Counsel, for the Petitioner.
- Shri Dominic Fernandes, Learned Senior Standing Counsel, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee company and its managing director were issued a common show cause notice (SCN) in Form GST DRC-01, which culminated in an Order-in-Original and a single Form GST DRC-07 imposing tax liability on both. As the managing director did not have GST registration, it was submitted that he could not make the composite Form GST DRC-07 the subject matter of an appeal. The petitioner sought temporary registration for the managing director, issuance of two separate Form GST DRC-07, and commencement of the period of limitation for filing the appeal from the date of issuance of the fresh Form GST DRC-07. The department submitted that temporary registration could be granted under Rule 16A of the CGST Rules and that a separate Form GST DRC-07 would be issued for the company and the managing director. The matter was placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the managing director, after obtaining temporary registration, was entitled to avail the statutory remedy of appeal and raise all grounds available in law and on the facts. The Court observed that the period of limitation for filing the appeal would commence only upon issuance of the fresh Form GST DRC-07. It directed the competent authority to issue two separate Form GST DRC-07, one each for the company and the managing director, to enable them to file separate statutory appeals. The writ petitions were disposed of without examining the merits of the contentions of the parties.
