Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010315442025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[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: 16314/2025
Between:
1. SRI HARI MUNGAMURU, D. NO. 27-3-23/E, 2ND MAIN ROAD,
MAGUNTA LAYOUT SPSR NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH - 524
003
...PETITIONER
AND
1. DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER,
NELLORE
DIVISION,
ANDHRA
PRADESH.
2. JOINT COMMISSIONER ST, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH.
3. STATE
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH,
REP.
BY
ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. THE
ANDHRA
PRADESH
INDUSTRIAL
INFRASTRUCTURE
CORPORATION LIMITED GOVT OF A P UNDERTAKING, PLOT NO.
1, IT. PARK, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH, REP. BY ITSMANAGING DIRECTOR.
5. 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
2
pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more
particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring that the impugned Order in
Form GST DRC- 07, vide DIN-3712032510235, dated 12.03.2025, passed by
the 1 Respondent for the Tax Periods 2021-22 and 2022-23 under the COST
and SGST Acts, 2017, imposing GST 18percent on the Works Contracts
(Road Works, drains etc) executed by the Petitioner for APliC which is a
Government Entity up to 31-12-2021, 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 22-08-20 17 and
Notification no. 24/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 21-09-2017, is without
jurisdiction, contrary to law and illegal and consequently set aside the same
or alternatively in case it is held that the rate of tax @ 18percent is correct,
direct the APIIC/ Respondent no. 4 to pay the differential tax @ 6percent with
interest in respect of works executed up to 31- 12-2021 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 APIIC/ Respondent no.
4 to pay the differential tax @ 6percent with interest for the works executed
w.e.f. 01-01-2022 to the Petitioner so as to Stenable 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 tax and
interest, pursuant to the impugned Order in Form GST DRC-07,
videDIN:3712032510235, dated 12.03.2025, passed by the 1®‘ Respondent
for the Tax Periods 2021-22 and 2022-23 under the COST and SGST Acts,
2017, and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K.RAGHAVENDER REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. SANTHI CHANDRA
2. SANTHI CHANDRA SC For APIIC
3. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
3
The Court made the following Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The issue 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
the 4th respondent 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.
3.Smt. Santhi Chandra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4th respondent would contend that there are some disputes as to the actual amount of tax already paid and whether such payments would cover even the differential amount that would be payable under this Order. In such circumstances, the 4th respondent shall, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this Order, set out the details of payment of tax made to the petitioner and the balance amount payable, on account of the differential rate of tax. Upon receipt of this communication, it would be open to the petitioner to reconcile the amounts payable. If such disputes persist, it would also be open to the petitioner to avail of his remedies, under the law, for finalization of the amounts payable to the petitioner.
4
4.Needless to say, the 4th respondent shall pay the admitted amount of differential tax, within two months from the date of receipt of this Order. 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.16314 of 2025 (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
BSM
