Nandini Enterprises vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax-Ii
Facts
The petitioner, Nandini Enterprises, represented by its Proprietor Sri Bokka Nageswara Rao, filed a writ petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The petition challenged the assessment orders passed on a best judgment basis under Section 62 of the SGST Act by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner of State Tax II, Eluru II Circle. The impugned order, dated April 21, 2025, pertained to the tax period of February 2025. The petitioner sought to declare these orders illegal, arbitrary, void, and violative of the GST Act and the Constitution. They also sought a direction to prevent coercive recovery steps pending the disposal of the writ petition. The State of Andhra Pradesh, through its Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) Department, was the respondent.
Held
The Court considered the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.V. Sai Rajesh, who sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file afresh. The Court granted this permission. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty granted to the petitioner to file a fresh petition. There were no orders as to costs. All pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the assessment orders passed on a best judgment basis under Section 62 of the SGST Act by the respondent authority are illegal, arbitrary, void, and violative of the provisions of the GST Act, 2017, and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the impugned assessment orders are deemed to be withdrawn as per Section 62(2) of the GST Act, 2017? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the assessment orders were illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the GST Act and the Constitution. They argued that the orders were void and should be deemed withdrawn under Section 62(2) of the GST Act. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare the orders as such and to set them aside, and also sought interim relief to prevent coercive recovery steps. Respondents' arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents. The counsel for the respondents appeared before the court.
Sections Cited
Section 62, Section 62(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
APHC010501632026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction)
MONDAY, THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 27770 OF 2026 Between:
NANDINI ENTERPRISES, Having their Regd. Premises at 11-6, 2ND Floor, Kondireddy Nagar, Eluru, Eluru District, Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Proprietor Sri Bokka Nageswara Rao ...Petitioner AND 1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXII, Eluru II Circle, Eluru 534 401
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) Dept., Velagapudi, Amaravati 522 237 ...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 toissue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the impugned Assessment Orders on Best Judgment Basis U/s. 62 of the SGST Act passed by the 1St Respondent vide Reference No. ZA370325093000X Dt. 21.04.2025 for tax period February, 2025 and
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.