M/s. Sai Sravanthi Engineering Contractors, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S. SAI SRAVANTHI ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS,, B COLONY, G243, DR.NTTPS, KONDAPALLI, APKRI, ANDHRA PRADESH521228. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, NAGA TALATAM RAJU, S/O.TALATAM RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP.522237

¶14

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, IBRAHIMPATNAM CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA.521456

¶15

THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONERST1, IBRAHIMPATNAM CIRCLE, NO I DIVISION, VIJAYAWADA.521456

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, direction or order more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the assessment ASMT-13 order 06-11-2023 for the month of 08/2023, passed by the 2nd respondent on best judgment basis without providing any opportunity

¶18

2

¶19

to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the GST Act, 2017, contrary to the circulars issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of the India and consequently set aside the same and pass such

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶21

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 may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings, including recovery, pursuant to the orders passed by the 2nd respondent in Form ASMT-13 dt.06-11-2023 for the period Aug, 2023 imposing on SGST of Rs.61520/- and CGST of Rs.61520/- (total Rs. 123040/-) and interest of CGST of Rs.1426/and SGST of Rs.1426/- (total Rs.2852/-) pending disposal of the Writ petition and pass such

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.P RAVIKANTH

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

3

¶28

The Court made the following Order:

¶29

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

¶30

Heard Sri P.Ravikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.

¶31

The petitioner, who was a registered person under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for brevity, the “ GST Act ”) had been served an order of assessment, dated 06.11.2023 for the month of August, 2023, passed by the 2^nd respondent.

¶32

The aforesaid order of assessment had been passed, under Section 62 of the GST Act, on the ground that the petitioner had not filed his returns for the month of August, 2023.

¶33

The petitioner now approached this Court contending that the respondents are still seeking to recover the dues under the said order, even though the petitioner had filed his returns, for the month of August, 2023 on 29.01.2024 with a delay of 131 days and had paid tax, interest and late fee payable on account of such delay.

¶34

The petitioner contends that on account of filing of returns in payment of tax and other dues, the order of assessment, passed under Section 62 of the GST Act, would be deemed to have been withdrawn on account of the provisions of Section 62(2) of the GST Act.

¶35

4

¶36