Dismissed

M/s.Indu Enterprises v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Apr 2024WP/9475/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed a writ petition challenging the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank account under the CGST Act, 2017. The court held that statutory alternative remedies were available and declined to interfere at this stage, leaving the petitioner to approach the competent authority.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed on the ground of availability of the statutory alternative remedy, with no order as to costs.

M/s.Indu Enterprises Vs The State of Andhra… — GST and Indirect Tax | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special OriginaUurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 9475 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s. Indu Enterprises, Rep. by its Proprietor M. Sarada, W/o.Veeraswamy, Aged-51 years, OccBusiness, R/o. H. NO. 19-4-123/8/A, STV Nagar, Maseed, Tirupati Urban, Tirupati District-517501.

¶10

...Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Commercial Tax) GST Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶13

The Director General of GST Intelligence, Visakhapatnam Zonal Unit, 0/o.D.No. 28-14-17, Suryabagh, Besides Melody Theatre, Visakhapatnam-20.

¶14

The Principal Additional Director General. O/o. Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Visakhapatnam Zonal Unit, Visakhapatnam.

¶15

Sri Yateesh Khandi, Senior Intelligence Officer, GST Intelligence Office, Visakhapatnam Zonal Unit, O/o. D.No. 28-14-17, Suryabagh.^Besides Melody Theatre, Visakhapatnam-20.

¶16

The Branch Manager, Bank of Board, Air by Pass Road Branch, O/o. H. No. 19-8-112/D, Air by Pass Road, Near Annamaiah Circle, Tirupati Town, Tirupati District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDMUS declaring the action of the Respondents No.3 through proceedings F.No. DGGI/INV/GST/3253/202 3-

¶19

GrJ 10322, DT-08-02-2024 illegally attached the petitioner account maintained in 5th respondent bank as arbitrary, illegal against Art. 19 And 2l of the Constitution of India and consequentially^{set-asidethesummons} issued by the respondent through Proceedings F.No. DGGI/INV/GST/3253/2023-GrJ 10321, Dt.09-02-2024 F.No. DGGI/INV/GST/3253/2023-GrJ, Dt.26-03-2024 directing to appear in person

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶21

Petition filed U/s. 151 CPC praying that is the High Court may be pleased to suspend the proceedings of the 3'"'^ respondent through proceedings F. No. DGGI/INV/GST/3253/2023-GrJ 10322,^{DT.08-02-2024}

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N RAJA REDDY

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 and 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.2: MRS. SANTHI CHANDRA SC

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No. 4 and 5: None

¶25

The Court made the following: Order

[3481]

( I

APHC010183552024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶30

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶32

PRESENT

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 9475/2024

Between:

M/s.indu Enterprises

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶41

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

1.N.RAJA REDDY

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

1 .GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶46

The Court made the following: (perHon’ble Sri Justice^{RaviNathTilhari)} Heard Sri N. Raja Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner^andlearned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax for the respondent No.1 and Ms. Santhi Chandra, learned Junior Standing Counsel^{forC.B.l.C.forthe} respondent No.2.

¶47

The petitioner is challenging the proceedings of the^respondent No.3, F.No.DGGI/INV/GST/3253/2023 - Gr J. dated 08.02.2024 of attachment of the petitioner's bank account. The said attachment is provisional

¶48

attachment under Section 83 of COST Act, 2017. The petitioner has the remedy to approach the Commissioner and file objection in view of Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules,^2017.

¶49

It could not be argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present case falls within any of the well recognized exceptions of the rule of exhaustion of alternative statutory remedy before approaching under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶50

In view thereof, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. 5. Leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the competent authority against the provisional attachment order, if so advised, the writ petition is dismissed at this stage only on the ground of availability of the statutory alternative remedy.

¶51

No order as to costs.

¶52

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also

¶53

stand closed.

¶54

¶55

Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

One CC to SRI N RAJA REDDY Advocate [OPUuj 2. Two CCS to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court of^Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶60

One CC to M/S. SANTHI CHANDRA SC

¶61

Three CD Copies

gsg

, High court

■ DATED: 24/04/2024

ORDER

WP.No.9475 of 2024

O'? r-
o
O oi'i
(;/3ri\0 2 9 JUL 2029 S?M
’rV

¶69

DISMISSING WP WITHOUT COSTS

M/s.Indu Enterprises v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Indu Enterprises v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Gogineni Srinivasa Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Traders Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ayyappa Plastic Industries Vs the Assisstant Commissioner of State Tax

M/s. Prasanna Constructions (Now Closed), Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax

Saraca Laboratories Ltd. Vs the Union of India

Kilaru Mahalakshmi Vs the Union of India