BharatTaxGST

Deccan Ferro Alloys PVT LTD vs. The Dy Commissioner(St)

Original PDF →
WP/22386/2024HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01043115202418 June 2025Bench: DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR,R RAGHUNANDAN RAO5 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
I ^s IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) A THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE E TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE V PRESENT ^ THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22386 OF 2024 Between: Deccan Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director Mr. P. Sivarama Raju, Visakhapatnam District. Ramanagar, Chintalapalem, Pendurthi- 531173 ...PETITIONERS AND The Dy. Commissioner(ST), O/o. the Chief Commissioner (ST), A.P., Kunchanapalli, Guntur District. The Additional Commissioner (ST), Appellate Authority, Vijayawada M/s. Gangisetty Sreedhar, 2, D No 21/185, Kamasawri, G Agraharam Near Up School, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram - 535128 Andhra Pradesh The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. The Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Rep. by its Secretary, New Delhi. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...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 grant the following reliefs A. To issue Writ of Mandamus and/or any other similar/appropriate Writ, declaring that the provisions of 4 clause (c) of Sec. 16 (2) of the Act, particularly the words the tax charged ip: respect of such supply has been actually paid to the government, in spite ofthe tax paid by the purchaser to the seller and the seller not paying the tax,to the Government, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, unfound and vjdiate the Articles 14, 19(l)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and in-operative in law to the extent it is prejudicial to the interest of the Petitioner and subject matter of the present Petition. Consequently, B. to declare that the Order No.DIN. 3731082357126 Dt.31-08-2023, (Ex. P-4) passed U/s. 73(1) of the APGST Act of 2017, and the CGST Act, 2017 for the tax period from April 2018 to March 2019, passed by the P Respondent, as illegal and in-operative in law. and C. to declare that the

order in Form GST-04 Dt. 29.04.2024 (Ex. P-5), passed by the 2 Respondent as illegal and in-operative in law. nd lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax COST of Rs. 4,17,202/- and SGST of Rs. 4,17,202/- and Interest of Rs. 3,19,404/- relating to COST and Rs. 3,19,404/- relating to SGST, for the tax period from April 2018 to March 2019 pursuant to the order of the 1st Respondent dated 31.08.2023 (Ex.P-4), as confirmed by the 2nd Respondent vide order in Form GST-04 Dt. 29.04.2024 (Ex. P-5), pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI L. CHANDRA OBUL REDDY FOR SRI A. SARVESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,2 & 4: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.3:— Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER

5ench Sr.No:-1 [3446] APHC010431152024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI K WRIT PETITION NO: 22386 of 2024 ...Petitioner M/s. Deccan Ferro Alloys Pvt Ltd Vs. ...Respondents The Dy Commissioner(ST) and Others Mr. L. Chandra Obul Reddy representing Mr. A Sarveswar Rao GP for Commercial Tax Advocate for Petitioner Advocate for Respondents CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO DATE : 19th June 2025 PC : Mr. L. Chandra Obul Reddy, learned counsel appearing vice Mr. A Sarveswar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner had paid the entire tax due as per the impugned order dated 31.08.2023 and seeks to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail the amnesty scheme contemplated under Section 128A of the COST Act, 2017. 2 HCJ & RRR, J WP_22386_2024 The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. M. RAMESH BABU deputy register //// N OFFICER SEC To, CC to Sri A. Sarveswar Rao, Advocate [OPUC] Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India,

1.

One

2.

One CC to Sri Pasala Ponna High Court of A.P.[OPUC]

3.

Two CCS to GP for lCommercial Tax, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

4.

Three CD Copies. ssb

HIGH COURT DATED: 19/06/2025 ORDER WP.No.22386 of 2024 DISMISSING THE W.P. AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

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.