Sv Agro Foods Products Vs Assistant Commissioner (S.T.)

SV AGRO FOODS PRODUCTS, 44-A/2, NELLATUR VILLAGE, GUDUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH - 524103. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SRI G.SANDEEP KUMAR

¶14

...PETITIONER

¶15

AND

¶16

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER S T, GUDUR CIRCLE, GUDUR - 524 101.

¶17

JOINT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, NELLORE DIVISION, NELLORE - 524 001.

¶18

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER S T, GUDUR - CIRCLE, GUDUR - 524101

¶19

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER S T, APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THUNGA RESIDENCY, FLAT NO.101, RENIGUNTA ROAD, TIRUPATHI - 517 501. CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶20

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, COMMERCIAL TAXES, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 237.

¶21

2

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

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 topleased to issue a Writ or Order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus setting aside the impugned Order in Appeal passed by the fourth respondent in Form GST APL - 04, dated 10.02.2026, vide CTD Order No.DIN3709022687639 (ZD37022601 1 658C), passed for the tax period January 2019 to February 2020, in subjecting the mixed vegetable cut mango lime and raw / unripe mango cut into pieces as classifiable under HSN Code 0812, taxable @5 percent rejecting the same as being classifiable under HSN Code 0711, exempt from the levy of tax, as illegal, arbitrary contrary to Notification No.2 of 2017 dated 28.06.2017 and contrary to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 / APGST Act, 2017, or to pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to pending disposal of the Writ Petition stay of all further proceedings arising in pursuance of the Order in Appeal passed by the fourth respondent in Form GST APL - 04, dated 10.02.2026, vide CTD Order No.DIN3709022687639 (ZD370226011658O), passed for the tax period January 2019 to February 2020, or to pass

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶27

1.S SURI BABU

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶30

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

3

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 17764 of 2026

¶36

ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya)

¶37

The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in business of vegetables, fruits, nuts and edible oil, etc., is an assessee on the rolls of the 1^st respondent with GSTIN bearing No.37ACOFSO859FIZQ, and submitting GSTR – 3B and GSTR – 1 Returns regularly and paying taxes thereon.

¶38

Pursuant to an inspection conducted by the 1^st respondent on 09.12.2020, an intimation of tax in Form GST 01A dated 21.09.2021 was issued to the petitioner. Objections dated 25.10.2021 were filed and thereafter, an assessment order in Form GST DRC – 07 dated 06.12.2021 under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017 for the period of January, 2019 to February, 2020 was passed. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner filed appeal before the 4^th respondent, who in turn vide proceedings dated 10.02.2026 modified the assessment order.

¶39

Though further appeal lies before the GSTAT, A.P. in terms of Section 112 of GST Act, on the premise that the Tribunal was not constituted, the present writ petition is filed.

¶40

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of various contentions raised in the writ petition, the same is liable to be allowed,

¶41

4

¶42

keeping in view the undisputed statutory realm, we deem it appropriate to relegate the petitioner to the statutory remedy of appeal.

¶43

In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedies, within a period of six (6) weeks, from today.

¶44

Needless to say, the period from the date of passing of the impugned order till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation.

¶45