Judgment
APHC010449612026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3543] TUESDAY, THE 1st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 24520/2026 Between:
1. M/S SRI GAYATHRI DEVI ENGINEERING SERVICES, GSTIN 37AUKPN0870D1ZM, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR - KUM. GAYATHRI NAME, 1-23-16, FLAT NO.16, SINI PLAZA, 3RD FLOOR, POTHINAMALLAYYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM-530 041, ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, BHEEMILI CIRCLE, 1-45/1B, 100 FEET ROAD, KOMMADI (V),
MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM-530 048, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, VIJAYA ELITE, 12- 468/4, ADJ. SERVICE ROAD TO NH-16, KUNCHANAPALLI-522501, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
3. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STII, BHEEMILI CIRCLE, 1-45/1B, 100 FEET ROAD, KOMMADI (V), MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM-530 048, ANDHRA PRADESH.
4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522 237, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, AXIS BANK, 3-22, OPP TDP OFFICE, ATCHUTAPURAM MAIN ROAD,
ATCHUTAPURAM-531011, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.24520 of 2026 2
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. C SANJEEVA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.24520 of 2026 3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Writ Petition No:24520 of 2026 The Court made the following Order:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.A.V.Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2.
With the consent of learned counsel on both sides, writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission.
3.
The petitioner was served with order of assessment under Form GST ASMT-13 dated 16.09.2023 and Summary of the order dated 16.09.2023 for the month of July, 2023. The said orders had been passed under Section 62 of the GST Act on the ground that the petitioner had not been filing its returns.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions with reference to the averments made in the writ affidavit and inter alia contended that the petitioner could not file monthly returns i.e., for the month of July, 2023 within the period stipulated under the statute. But, the same were filed on 03.02.2024 with 167 days delay and additional late fee was also paid on 21.08.2026. He further submits that though applicable interest and late fee is paid on the delayed return for the month of July, 2023, respondent No.1 have not withdrawn the Orders dated 16.09.2023, as such, petitioner is constrained to file the writ petition.
NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.24520 of 2026 4
5.
The details of the date of demand order, date of filing of returns etc., are set out in the table below:
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) Additional late fee in Form DRC-03 dated 21.08.2026 CGST SGST July, 2023 16.09.2023 03.02.2024 4,175.00 4,175.00 1,175.00 1,175.00 Total 4,175.00 4,175.00 1,175.00 1,175.00 6.
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.
7.
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 orders, detailed above, passed under Section 62 of the GST Act are deemed to have been withdrawn.
8.
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.
NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.24520 of 2026 5
9.
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.
10.
Accordingly, Writ Petition is allowed. Assessment Order under challenge passed under Section 62 of the Act is deemed to have been withdrawn and no steps for recovery can be initiated or continued for recovery of the taxes and dues raised under the said order of assessment. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Date:01.09.2026 Ksj