Shri Sreya Kushal Infrastructure PVT LTD vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO" WRIT PETITION NO: 25083 OF 2023 Between: Shri^ Sreya Kushal Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Flat No.101, Teja Garden ApaHments, Prakash Nagar, N.R. Pet, Kurnool-518001. Rep. by its Director, Shri G.Kamalakara Reddy. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner, (S.T.) - 1, Kurnool-ll Circle, Kurnool. 2'. The Joint Commissioner (S.T), Kurnool Division, Kurnool. S.^tate of A.P., Rep.by its Principal Secretary, (Revenue C.T-II) " Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed 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) declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in passing the Proceedings date 24.03.2023 for the tax period July 2017 to October 2021 under the CGST Act, 2017 as arbitrary,illegal, without authority of law, without jurisdiction, vitiated by procedural irregularity, violative of principles of natural Justice and Articles 14 and 265 of Constitution of India (B)Declare Sub- section (4) of Section 16 of CGST Act 2017 and the APGST Act, 2017 as being manifestly arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 265 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently quash them as unconstitutional and illegal (C)Alternatively declaring that the conditions prescribed by Sub section (4) of Section 16 of the COST Act, 2017, as merely procedural in nature and which cannot override the substantive conditions as mentioned under Sub- sections (1) and (2) of Section 16. (D)Declaring that the retrospective amendment made to Rule 61 of the COST Rules, 2017, by amending Sub- Rule (5) thereof and deleting Sub-Rule (6) thereof, with retrospective effect is violative of Article 279A of the Constitution. (E)Declaring that Sec.39 of the COST Act, 2017, does not bar filing of returns without payment of tax and the GSTIN not allowing furnishing of such returns without payment of tax as arbitrary and unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (F)Quashing/ Setting aside Press Release No. 65/2018, dated 10.09.2018 portal to the extent it purports to clarify that if there is delay in filing of the returns i Form GSTR - 3B from the due date of furnishing of the returns for the of September following the end of the financial in month year or furnishing of the relevant annual returns, whichever is earlier, would render the Input Tax Credit time barred, and (G) Declare the action of 1st Respondent in invoking Section 50(3) of the CGST and APGST Acts, 2017 in the absence of any proceedings under Section 42(1), (3), (4) and (5) as arbitrary, unsustainable and without jurisdiction (H) Consequently set aside the Proceedings of 1st Respondent, dated 24.03.2023, as null and void. the lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Proceedings 1st respondent, dated 24.03.2023 in FORM GST DRC-07 for the tax.period July 2017 to October 2021 under the CGST Act, Petitioner would be put to severe loss and hardship. of the 2017, as otherwise, the Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SUREDDY HARSHITHA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX