Mopati Chandra Sekhar Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Held
The Court held that the notice issued in FORM GST DRC-13 dated 21.03.2025 for freezing the petitioner's bank account had become infructuous. This was because the very assessment orders, which were the foundation for this notice, had already been set aside by this Court in a previous order dated 18.06.2025 in W.P.No.13372 of 2025 and batch. The Court reasoned that an action taken pursuant to an order that has been nullified or set aside loses its legal basis and effect. Therefore, the impugned notice was rendered invalid and without consequence. The Court proceeded to set aside the impugned notice. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, Mopati Chandra Sekhar Reddy, filed a writ petition challenging the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing a notice in FORM GST DRC-13 dated 21.03.2025. This notice was for freezing the operations of the petitioner's current account in Indian Bank. The impugned notice was issued pursuant to orders of assessment. However, these assessment orders had already been set aside by the High Court in W.P.No.13372 of 2025 and batch, through an order dated 18.06.2025. Consequently, the notice for freezing the bank account became infructuous.
Key Issues
1. Whether the notice issued in FORM GST DRC-13 dated 21.03.2025 for freezing the petitioner's bank account is valid, given that the underlying assessment orders have been set aside by this Court? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that since the assessment orders, which formed the basis for the impugned notice, were already set aside by this Court on 18.06.2025, the notice for freezing the bank account has become infructuous and consequently invalid. No specific provisions were cited by the petitioner in the provided text, but the argument hinges on the principle that an action based on a void or set-aside order cannot stand. Respondent's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent (The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others).
Sections Cited
GST DRC-13
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
APHC010286762025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3541] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 14517/2025 Between: Mopati Chandra Sekhar Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:
K V ADITYA CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing notice under FORM GST DRC-13, dated 21.03.2025, for freezing the operations of the current account of the petitioner in Indian Bank.
2 RRR, J & JS, J W.P.No.14517 of 2025
This impugned notice has been issued pursuant to the orders of assessment, which have already been set aside by this Court in W.P.No.13372 of 2025 and batch, by an order, dated 18.06.2025. 3. In the circumstances, the said impugned notice becomes infructuous and is set aside.
4
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.