Nuthi Narayana Rao vs. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, a contractor, challenged an order imposing GST on works contracts executed for government entities. The petitioner argued that the rate applied was contrary to a specific notification. The court had previously decided a similar issue in another writ petition.
Held
The High Court disposed of the writ petition by affirming the assessment order. However, it directed the government entities to pay the differential tax amount to the petitioner to enable them to remit it to the department.
Key Issues
Whether the GST rate applied to works contracts executed for government entities was correct as per the relevant notification. The court also considered the mechanism for payment of differential tax.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
APHC010094692025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3529] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 5092/2025 Between:
NUTHI NARAYANA RAO, S/O. ANJANEYULU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. D.NO.8-359/1, PIDUGURALLA (V), PIDUGURALLA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, STATE TAX) PIDUGURALLA CIRCLE, D.NO. 19-1077/1, BEHIND VALLELA RESIDENCY, BESIDES THE COURT OF JUDICIAL CIVIL JUDGE, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT, PINCODE 522413. 2. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, PIDUGURALLA CIRCLE, D.NO. 19-1077/1, BEHIND VALLELA RESIDENCY, BESIDES THE COURT OF JUDICIAL CIVIL JUDGE, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT, PINCODE 522413. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF THE GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE (ST) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, AGRICULTURAL MARKETING, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT.
DACHEPALLI NAGAR PANCHAYATHI, REP. BY ITS 2
COMMISSIONER, DACHEPALLI, PALNADU DISTRICT.
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT.
PIDUGURALLA MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT.
THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE), MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 issue a writ of memdamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring that the impugned Order in Form GST DRC-07, vide ARN AD3707240039018, dated 24.01.2025, passed by the 2nd Respondent for the Tax Period 2023-24 under Section 73 of APGST Act, 2017, imposing GST @ 18 percentage on the Works Contracts (Government Works) executed by the Petitioner for Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 which are Government Entities, is contrary SI.No. 3 (vi) of the Notification no. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 as amended by Notification no. 20/2017- Central Tax (Rate), dated 22.08.2017, is without juri iction, contrary to law and illegal and consequently set aside the same or alternatively in case it is held that the rate of tax @ 18 percentage is correct, direct the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 to pay the differential tax @ 6 percentage with interest as Rs.9,45,059/- in respect of works executed either to the Petitioner to enable it to pay to the Department or directly to the Department to the Account of the Petitioner and further direct the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 to pay the differential tax @ 6 percentage with interest as Rs.9,45,059/- for the works executed w.e.f. 01.01.2022 to the Petitioner so as to enable the Petitioner to pay the same to the Department or to pay the same directly to the Department to the account of the Petitioner and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings, including recovery of differential tax @ 6% with interest as Rs.9,45,059/-, pursuant to the impugned Order in Form GST DRC-07, vide ARN: AD3707240039018, dated
3
2025, passed by the 2^’^ Respondent for the Tax Period 2023-24 under Section 73 of APGST Act, 2017, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
BATHALA RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities
GP FOR AGRICULTURE
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI
4
The Court made the following Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The issues raised in the present Writ Petition has been decided by this Court, by an order, dated 24.07.2024, in W.P.No.22663 of 2023. 2. Following the said Judgment, this Writ Petition is disposed of, affirming the order of assessment. However, there shall also be a direction to respondents 4, 5, 6 & 7 to pay the differential amount of taxes for the assessment periods, covered under the impugned assessment order to the petitioner to enable the said petitioner to pass on the said tax to the Commercial Tax Department. The said payment shall be cleared within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of this order.
Needless to say, if any interest is recoverable from the petitioners, for late payment, the same would also have to be borne by respondents 4, 5, 6 & 7. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
_________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J
Date: 01.12.2025 BSM
5
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.5092 of 2025 (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
2025
BSM
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.