Sudha Enterprises vs. Senior Intelligence Officer

> APHC010081582025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 4401 OF 2025 Between: M/s. Sudha Enterprises, rep. by its Proprietrix Smt. Sudharani Malepati Suprada Nivas, Rampura, Near Chintamani Temple, Srinivasanagar, Gavanahalli, Chickmaglore, Karnataka-577133. ...Petitioner AND 1. Senior Intelligence Officer, O/o. Director General of GST Intelligence, Visakhapatnam Zonal Unit, 28-14-17, Surya Bagh, Visakhapatnam-53 0 020. 2. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Vigilence04, Floor, Room No.204, VTK-2 Building, Koramangala, Bengaluru-560 047. 3. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Enforcement, Chikkamagalur, Karnataka. 4. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Chief Secretary and Special Chief Secretary to Government (FAC), State Tax Department, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 5. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, 3'’'^ Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001. ^^4 6. State of Karnataka, rep. by its Chief Secretary and Special Chief Secretary to Government(FAC), State Tax Department, Bangalore, Karnataka. ...Respondents 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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction (a) restraining the Respondent from proceeding any further with the investigation enquiry proceedings initiated under Sections 67 & 70 of the Central GST Act, 2017 in view of the embargo contained in Section 6(2)(b) of the Central GST Act, 2017 or (b) alternatively, declare that the Petitioner can be subjected to enquiry proceedings under Sections 67 & 70 of the GST Act before only one authority, i.e either Central Tax Authority or the State Tax Authority but cannot be subjected to simultaneous dual enquiry proceedings by both and consequently direct either the 1®* Respondent, being the Centra! Tax Authority, or the 2"^^ Respondent, being the Karnataka State Tax Authority, to refrain from proceedings any further in their enquiry proceedings in the interest of fairness and justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim stay of all further proceedings initiated by the 1®* Respondent under summons dated 4.2.2025 pending disposal of the Writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR CBIC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 ;GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI P. PONNA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : NONE APPEARED