M/S. Pipe Agency vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Held
The Court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the 2nd respondent, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Bhavanipuram Circle, Vijayawada, to pass appropriate orders on the reply dated 18.02.2021, submitted by the petitioner. This reply was in response to the notice dated 04.02.2021. The Court ordered that these orders should be passed in accordance with the law and as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court took into consideration the statements made by both learned counsel. No specific finding was given on the illegality of the notices themselves, as the primary relief granted was a direction to adjudicate the pending reply.
Facts
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a Mandamus to declare notices dated 04.02.2021, 07.07.2021, and 16.07.2021, issued by the 2nd respondent (Assistant Commissioner (ST), Bhavanipuram Circle, Vijayawada), as illegal. These notices were consequent to a demand raised in Form GST DRC-07, despite the petitioner claiming to have already cleared the tax dues. The petitioner had responded to the initial notice dated 04.02.2021 with a reply on 18.02.2021. However, the petitioner contended that the authorities continued to issue further notices demanding payment of amounts already paid, without addressing the petitioner's reply.
Key Issues
1. Whether the notices dated 04.02.2021, 07.07.2021, and 16.07.2021, issued by the 2nd respondent, are illegal and improper, given that the petitioner claims to have already cleared the tax dues and submitted a reply to the initial notice. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the authorities issued subsequent demand notices without addressing the reply dated 18.02.2021, which was submitted in response to the notice dated 04.02.2021. The petitioner sought a direction to the authorities to pass appropriate orders on this reply. Revenue's contention: The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax fairly submitted that reasonable time may be granted to the authorities to pass orders on the petitioner's reply dated 18.02.2021, in accordance with the law.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.RAVINDRA BABU WRIT PETITION No.29658 OF 2021
ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice C. Praveen Kumar)
Heard Sri A. Srinath, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri T.C.D. Sekhar, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents.
The present Writ Petition came to be filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the notices dated 04.02.2021, 07.07.2021 and 16.07.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent, consequent to demand raised in Form GST DRC-07, though the petitioner has already cleared the tax dues, as illegal, improper and incorrect.
It is the case of the petitioner that in response to the notice, dated 04.02.2021, issued by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner gave a reply to the said notice on 18.02.2021. It is said that without responding to the said reply, the authorities are issuing notices one after the other demanding payment of the amount, which is already paid.
2
In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his request is only to direct the authorities concerned to pass appropriate orders on the reply, dated
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.