Allowed¶44

Katakam Infra Projects (India) Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Jul 2026WP/17897/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; W.P. No.17897 of 2026; Katakam Infra Projects; Section 62 GST Act assessment order deemed withdrawn; Section 62(2) late fee; GSTR 3B filed after demand order; bank attachment set aside; Madras High Court W.P.(MD) No.18740 of 2024 followed; Brothers Engineering W.P.No.20705 of 2025 followed; writ allowed 06.07.2026; Ninala Jayasurya and T.C.D. Sekhar JJ.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition allowed; bank attachments, if any, caused under the order of assessment shall stand set aside; no costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ¶44

Katakam Infra Projects (India) Private Limited… — GST and Indirect Tax | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Petition allowed; bank attachments, if any, caused under the order of assessment shall stand set aside; no costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶44

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can seek to recover the amount demanded under the assessment order passed under Section 62 of the GST Act despite the petitioner having filed its GSTR 3B returns for the relevant period along with late fee, rendering the order deemed withdrawn under Section 62(2). +1 more

¶35

Court's answer

Section 62(2) of the GST Act stipulates that any order passed under Section 62 is deemed to have been withdrawn once the necessary returns are filed within the period stipulated under that provision; in the event of delay, late fee is required to be paid by the registered person filing the returns.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner paid the necessary late fee, the order passed under Section 62 of the GST Act is deemed to have been withdrawn.

¶39

Key takeaways

Following the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras (which held that, in view of the amendment to Section 62(2), delay in filing GSTR 3-B returns should be condoned and the assessment order deemed withdrawn) and this Court's earlier order in W.P.No.20705 of 2025, the benefit under Section 62(2) of the Act is extended to the petitioner.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

GST - Assessment order under Section 62 of the GST Act for June 2023 (demand order dated 21.08.2023) passed on the ground of non-filing of returns - Petitioner subsequently filed Form GSTR 3B on 15.12.2023 with late fee of Rs.2,500 (CGST) and Rs.2,500 (SGST) u/s 62(2) - Under Section 62(2), an order passed under Section 62 is deemed withdrawn once necessary returns are filed within the stipulated period, subject to payment of late fee on delay - Following the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) decision in Writ Petition (MD) No.18740 of 2024 and this Court's earlier order in W.P.No.20705 of 2025 (M/s. Brothers Engineering and Errectors Limited Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh), benefit of deemed withdrawal under Section 62(2) extended to petitioner - Writ Petition allowed; bank attachments under the assessment order set aside; no costs.

¶1

[3543]

¶2

Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 06.07.2026 Date of uploading :

¶3

APHC010331492026

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶5

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶6

MONDAY, THE 6^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶9

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO: 17897/2026

¶11

Between:

¶12

KATAKAM INFRA PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SMT. KATAKAM PADMAVATHI, 7-59A, SVKP STREET, CUMBUM TOWN, PRAKASAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 523 333.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, MARKAPUR CIRCLE, NELLORE DIVISION, D.NO 10-204/36, S.NO.226/A, BESIDE SVKP COLLEGE, Y.PALEM ROAD, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 518 002.

¶16

THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, MARKAPUR CIRCLE, NELLORE DIVISION, D.NO 10-204/36, S.NO.226/A, BESIDE SVKP COLLEGE, Y.PALEM ROAD, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 518 002.

¶17

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (COMMERCIAL TAX), A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI - 522 238.

¶18

UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE), NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110

¶19

NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.17897 of 2026

¶20

¶21

¶22

AXIS BANK LTD, MAIN BRANCH, ONGOLE REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, D.NO.37-1-406/10, TRUNK ROAD, OPP LIE OF INDIA, BHAGYA NAGAR, ONGOLE, ANDHRA PRADESH - 523 001.

¶23

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶28

NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.17897 of 2026

¶29

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶32

Writ Petition No:17897 of 2026

¶33

The Court made the following Order: (per NJS,J)

¶34

The petitioner was served with order of assessment for the month of June, 2023. The Order had been passed under Section 62 of the GST Act on the ground that the petitioner had not been filing its returns.

¶35

Petitioner has approached this Court with the contention that the respondents are seeking to recover the amount demanded under the said order of assessment despite the fact that the petitioner had filed its returns, in Form GSTR 3B for the relevant period along with late fee. It is contended that no tax or interest was payable as the returns related to exempted turnovers.

¶36

The details of the date of demand order, date of filing of returns etc., are set out in the table below:

¶37

Month	Date of impugned Demand Order	Date of filing of Form GSTR 3B	CGST late fee u/s 62(2)	SGST Late fees u/s. 62(2)
June-2023	21.08.2023	15.12.2023	2,500	2,500

¶38

Section 62(2) of the GST Act stipulates that any order passed under Section 62, would be deemed to have been withdrawn once necessary returns are filed within the period stipulated under the said provision. In the event of delay, late fee is required to be paid by the registered person who seeks to file the said returns.

¶39

In the present case, petitioner is said to have paid the necessary late fee. In such circumstances, it would have to be deemed that the order, detailed above, passed under Section 62 of the GST Act is deemed to have been withdrawn.

¶40

NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.17897 of 2026

¶41

¶42

Further, similar issue has fallen for consideration before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras (Madurai Bench) in Writ Petition (MD) No.18740 of 2024 and after considering the same, the High Court of Madras had held that in view of the amendment to Section 62(2) of the Act, it would be appropriate to condone the delay in filing GSTR 3-B returns and consequently the Assessment Order would have to be deemed to be withdrawn.

¶43

Further, this Court following the judgment rendered by Hon’ble High Court of Madras, allowed W.P.No.20705 of 2025 filed by M/s. Brothers Engineering and Errectors Limited Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh. In such circumstances, the benefit under Section 62(2) of the Act has to be extended to the petitioner as well.

¶44

Accordingly, Writ Petition is allowed. Bank attachments, if any, caused under the aforesaid order of assessment, shall stand set aside. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶45

__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶46

_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶47

Date:06.07.2026 Ksj

¶48

Whether the order is:

¶49

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

Katakam Infra Projects (India) Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Katakam Infra Projects (India) Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Usha Enterprises Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Siva Electricals Vs the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)

M/S VenkateshHotha Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Goodwill Agencies (Partnership firm) Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Goodwill Agencies (Partnership firm) Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

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