Allowed¶39

M/s. Kolli Projects v. The Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes)

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Feb 2026WP/3087/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati), W.P.No.3087 of 2026, decided 11.02.2026 (R. Raghunandan Rao & T.C.D. Sekhar, JJ.; order per R. Raghunandan Rao, J): where a dealer against whom Section 62 GST assessment orders (ASMT-13) were passed later files GSTR-3B returns and pays tax, interest and late fee, the Section 62(2) deeming provision operates and the assessment orders stand deemed withdrawn, so recovery of the assessed tax cannot proceed. Keywords: Section 62 APGST Act; Section 62(2) deemed withdrawal; ASMT-13; GSTR-3B belated return; Rule 100(1); writ allowed.

What did the court decide?

Declaration that the assessment orders dated 21.08.2023, 06.06.2024 and 13.06.2024 are deemed to have been withdrawn; no order as to costs. ¶39

M/s. Kolli Projects Vs The Assistant… — GST and Indirect Tax | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3529]

¶2

APHC010051862026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 3087/2026

¶10

Between:

¶11

M/S. KOLLI PROJECTS, GSTID-37AMAPK7956N2ZA REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SMT. K. VISALAKSHMI 69-12-15, SBI COLONY, SRINIVASA NAGAR KAKINADA - 533003 EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAXES, KAKINADA CIRCLE D.O. 10-355, 3RD FLOOR, COMMERCIAL TAXES COMPLEX PITAHPURAM ROAD, KAKINADA - 533001

¶15

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, RE. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE CT-II DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522237, AMARAVATHI,GUNTUR DIST., ANDHRA PRADESH

¶16

THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110001

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶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 topleased to be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in not withdrawing the impugned orders in Form ASMT-

¶19

¶20

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.3087 of 2026

¶21

13, dated 21.8.2023, 6.6.2024 and 13.6.2024 for the months April to June 2023, March 2024 and April 2024, under the AP Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 even though the Petitioner had filed the returns in Form GSTR-3B for the said months after paying applicable taxes, late fees and interest, as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice, contrary to Section 62(2) of the GST Act read with Rule 100(1) of the Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 and set aside the same, and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶23

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 grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned GST orders in ASMT-13, dated 21.8.2023, 6.6.2024 and 13.6.2024 for the months April to June 2023, March 2024 and April 2024, passed by the 1®* Respondent under Section 62 of the Act as in contravention of Section 62(2) of the Act, pending disposal of the Writ Petition, as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶28

¶29

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.3087 of 2026

¶30

The Court made the following Order: (per Hon9ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

¶31

The petitioner had suffered orders of assessment, under Section 62 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 8the Act9) , for the months of April-2023 to June-2023, March-2024 & April-2024, by orders, dated 21.08.2023, 06.06.2024 & 13.06.2024 respectively. These orders were passed, on the ground that, the petitioner had not been filing its returns.

¶32

The petitioner has now approached this Court, aggrieved by the subsequent steps being taken, for recovery of the taxes assessed, under the aforesaid orders of assessment.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had filed necessary returns, in Form GSTR–3B, for the months of April-2023 to June-2023, on 17.11.2023 and for the months of March-2024 & April-2024, on 24.12.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, all the necessary taxes, interest and late fee, payable, according to the returns filed by the petitioner, had also been paid. However, the respondents are persisting in recovering the taxes assessed, under the earlier orders of assessment, passed under Section 62 of the Act.

¶34

The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submits that, the Forms had been filed, on the dates mentioned by the petitioner, and that, the late fee, penalty and tax had also been paid, as stated in the table set out in paragraph-8 in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition.

¶35

¶36

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.3087 of 2026

¶37

In the said circumstances, the deeming provision of Section 62(2) of the

¶38

Act, would be applicable and the said orders, would have to be deemed to be withdrawn.

¶39

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed, declaring that the said orders, dated 21.08.2023, 06.06.2024 & 13.06.2024, are deemed to have been withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶40

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶41

________________________

¶42

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶43

_________________

¶44

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

¶45

Date:11.02.2026 KPV