Sri Nandi Enterprises Vs Assistant Commissioner

SRI NANDI ENTERPRISES, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, DWARSALA VENKATA KONDA REDDY, S/O D VENKATA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, D.NO 2-2-259, SRI RAMULA PETA, YERRAGUNTLA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 516 309

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, PULIVENDULA CIRCLE, KADAPA DIVISION, PULIVENDULA -516 390

¶14

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, PULIVENDULA CIRCLE, KADAPA DIVISION, PULIVENDULA - 516 390

¶15

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 503

¶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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus of any other appropriate Writ or

¶19

2

¶20

direction declaring the Assessment Order in Form ASMT 13 dated 16.10.2023 passed by the 1St Respondent under Section 62(1) of the GST Act, 2017 for August 2023 without DIN and signature, and subsequent attachment notice of immovable property dated 18.12.2025 issued by the 2nd Respondent, as being illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Section 62(2), unsustainable, nonapplication of mind and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶22

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 to grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Assessment Order in Form ASMT-13 dated 16.10.2023 passed by the 1St Respondent under Section 62(1) of the GST Act, 2017 for August 2023 without DIN and signature, and subsequent attachment notice of immovable property dated 18.12.2025 issued by the 2nd Respondent, and pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24

1.L CHANDRA OBUL REDDY

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶27

¶28

3

¶29

The Court made the following order:

¶30

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)

¶31

The petitioner is a registered person under the GST region. The 1^st respondent passed an order of assessment, dated 16.10.2023 for the period of August, 2023, under Section 62 of the Goods and Services Act, 2017 (for short 8GST Act9). This assessment order came to be passed on the ground that the petitioner had not been filed relevant returns for this month. It appears that the petitioner had however, filed the necessary returns on 21.10.2023.

¶32

The petitioner has now approached this Court with the contention that the respondents are seeking to recover the demands raised under the order, dated 16.10.2023, even though the said order would have to be deemed to have been withdrawn by virtue of the provisions of Section 62(2) of the GST Act which stipulates that any order passed under Section 62 of the GST Act would be deemed to have been withdrawn if the necessary returns have been filed within 60 (60) days from the date of the order passed under Section 62 of the GST Act.

¶33

In the present case, the date of order is 16.10.2023 while the returns had been filed on 21.10.2023.

¶34

In the circumstances, the order, dated 16.10.2023 would be deemed to have been withdrawn. Accordingly, no further proceedings would have been initiated for recovery of the amounts raised under the said order.

¶35

4

¶36

In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed holding that the order, dated 16.10.2023 stands withdrawn by virtue of deeming clause under Section 62(2) of the GST Act and no further steps can be taken for recovery of the amount under the said order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

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

¶38

________________________

¶39

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶40

________________

¶41

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date: 07.01.2026 KA

¶42

5