BharatTaxGST

M/S. G. Bhaktisar vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)-Ii

Original PDF →
WP/2886/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01005471202511 February 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,HARINATH.N6 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. M V J K KUMARFor Respondent: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DY, SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT V THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO^^oivA 5 o cc *5 AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 2886 OF 2025 Between: M/s. G. Bhaktisar, 15/182-A, Old Rice Mill.Madithadu, Rachapalli Annamalai District -516130Andhra Pradesh. Rep. by its Proprietor Sri. G. Bhaktisar, S/o. G. Ramanuja Charyulu,Aged about 65 Years. 37 ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-II, Chittoor-ll Circle,Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh. 2. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District,Andhra Pradesh. 3. Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi-110001. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS ) declaring the action of the 1 Respondents in passing the order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 06-11-2024 in DIN No. DIN3706112482138 in not considering the turnovers for the assessment period March 2022 reported in April 2024 and payments made vide DRC -03 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, unfair, contrary to GST Act 2017 and rules and also not issuing a show cause notice under section may St violative of principles of natural justice and also contrary to articles 14, 73 as 19(1)(g). 21 , 265 and 300A of the Constitution of India and also violave of of the Kerala High Court reported in (2024) 169 the. judgement ? Taxmann.com 152 and consequently to set aside the same. ?- . ‘ TA N^Q: 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 to grant STAY of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Respondent in Form GST DRC-07 dated 06-11- st order passed by the 1 2024 in DIN No. DIN3706112482138 pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. M V J K KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 & 2: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

The Court made the following ORDER:

APHC010054712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3488] WEDNE AY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 2886/2025 Between: M/s. G. Bhaktisar, ...PETITIONER AND The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stii and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.MVJKKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.

GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following Order: ...RESPONDENT(S) [perHon’ble Sri Justice R RAGHUNANDAN RAO] The petitioner has been served with an order of assessment dated 06.11.2024 faising a demand of Rs.9,49,752/-. This summary of order issued by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax-ll/Chittoor-ll Circle, Chittoor is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the said amounts have already

* been paid. It is the case of the petitioner that the payment made by the petitioner fresh demand has been raised in relation has not been taken into account and a taxes which have already been paid. to instructions, submits that the petitioner the Assessing Authority pointing out the Learned Government Pleader, on 2. may place, a representation before payment of tax and for adjustments of such payments against the tax demanded under the impugned order. Learned Government Pleader would submit that on made, necessary steps would be taken to verify the such representation being payment of tax and for under the impugned order. adjustment of such payments against the tax demanded The case of the petitioner is that though the tax demanded under the inadvertently categorised under 3. impugned order has been paid, the same the IGST instead of CGST and SGST. was 4. In the circumstances this writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the representation setting out these facts. Upon such directed to consider the same petitioner to file a representation being filed, the respondent is out necessary adjustments on tax, if it is found that they have been and carry wrongly categorized under the IGST payment, within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of the receipt of this Order.

3^

5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// SECl-lj OFFICER To 1. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-II, Chittoor-ll Circle,Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District,Andhra Pradesh.

3.

The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Union of India, New Delhi-110001. 4. One CC to SF^tl. M V J K KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

5.

One CC to SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA [OPUC]

6.

Two CCS to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

7.

Three CD Copies PRK

HIGH COURT DATED:12/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.2886 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. 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.