Ms Bontha Bharat Babu vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Held
The Court did not decide the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner, appearing online, sought permission from the Court to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file afresh. The Court accorded permission and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn, granting the liberty as sought by the petitioner. There were no orders as to costs, and all miscellaneous petitions were closed. The specific issues regarding the legality and jurisdiction of the show cause notice and consequential orders were not adjudicated upon.
Facts
The petitioner, MS Bontha Bharat Babu, a works contractor, filed a writ petition challenging a common show cause notice (SCN) in Form GST DRC-01 dated 20.10.2025, issued by the Assistant Commissioner ST, Mandapeta Circle (2nd respondent) for tax periods 2019-20 and 2020-21, under Section 74 of the APGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also challenged the consequential order dated 24.03.2026 and the summary of the order in Form GSTR-07, dated 24.03.2026, issued by the Assistant Commissioner ST, Nidadavole Circle (3rd respondent) for the period 2020-21. The petitioner sought to declare these actions illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of constitutional provisions. An interim application was filed seeking a stay of further proceedings and recovery.
Key Issues
1. Whether the common show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01, dated 20.10.2025, issued by the 2nd respondent for the tax periods 2019-20 and 2020-21, under Section 74 of the APGST Act, 2017, is illegal, without jurisdiction, and contrary to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017, and the rules made thereunder, and also violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the consequential order dated 24.03.2026 and the summary of the order in Form GSTR-07, dated 24.03.2026, issued by the 3rd respondent for the period 2020-21, are illegal and liable to be set aside? The petitioner argued that the show cause notice, consequential order, and summary of order were illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of constitutional provisions. The respondents, represented by the Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, did not present any arguments as recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
APHC010531432026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 8th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 29140 OF 2026 Between:
MS BONTHA BHARAT BABU, Works Contractor, s/o.chinna rao,8-81, Yernagudem, Devarapalle Mandal, West Godavari District-534313. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT-II) Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, AP-522238 of 2026
The Assistant CommissionerST, Mandapeta Circle, D.No.17-1-18 and19, Raghavendra Complex, Alamuru Road, Mandapeta, Ambedkar Konaseema District,Andhra Pradesh-533308
Assistant Commissioner ST, Nidadavole Circle, D.No. 2-2-83, Pangidi Road, Nidadavole, East Godavari District- 534301. ...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, direction or order more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus d
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.