Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/27970/2026 of SAIVIJAYA ENTERPRISES Vs The Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes) on 27 September 2026
TCDS,J W.P.No. 27970 of 2026 Dated 28.09.2026 APHC010514492026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3543] MONDAY, THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT
APHC010514492026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
Between:
1. SAIVIJAYA ENTERPRISES, GSTID-37AK0PN5851N1Z8 REP. BY ITS
PROPRIETOR, SRI N. VIJAYA MURALI FLAT NO.41, 42, BALAJI
NILAYAM, MAIN ROAD COLLECTION CENTRE, VENKAMPETA, PARVATHIPURAM
MANDAL,
VIZIANAGARAM
DIST.,
ANDHRA
PRADESH, PIN CODE-535522
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAXES, PARVATHIPURAM
CIRCLE GROUND AND 1ST FLOOR, OPP LIC OFFICE BELAGAM, PARVATHIPURAM
535522
VIZIANAGARAM
DIST.,
ANDHRA
PRADESH
2. THE
DEPUTY
ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER
STATE
TAXES,
PARVATHIPURAM CIRCLE GROUND AND 1ST FLOOR, OPP LIC
OFFICE BELAGAM, PARVATHIPURAM 535522 VIZIANAGARAM DIST., ANDHRA PRADESH
3. THE
ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER
STATE
TAXES,
SOUTH
CIRCLE,VIZIANAGARAM
KOPPU
GURANNA
BUILDINGS,
SIDDHARTHA NAGAR, VIZIANAGARAM -535002 ANDHRA PRADESH
4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
REVENUE
CT-II
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI-522503 AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST., ANDHRA
PRADESH
5. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE)
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110001
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. With the consent of learned counsel on both sides, writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission.
3. The petitioner was served with order of assessment under Form GST ASMT-13 dated 30.01.2024 and Summary of the order dated 30.01.2024 for the month of November, 2023. The said orders had been passed under Section 62 of the GST Act on the ground that the petitioner had not been filing its returns.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions with reference to the averments made in the writ affidavit and inter alia contended that the petitioner could not file monthly returns i.e., for the month of November, 2023 within the period stipulated under the statute. But, the same were filed on 21.12.2024 with certain days of delay and additional late fee was also paid on 25.09.2026. He further submits that though applicable interest and late fee is also paid on the delayed returns for the month of November, 2023, respondent No.1 have not withdrawn the Orders dated 30.01.2024, as such, petitioner is constrained to file the writ petition.
5. The details of the date of demand order, date of filing of returns etc., are set out in the table below: Month Date of impugned Demand
Order
Date of filing of Form GSTR 3B CGST late fee u/s 62(2) SGST Late fees u/s. 62(2) Additional late fee in Form DRC-03 dated 25.09.2026 CGST SGST November,
30.01.2024 21.12.2024 20.00 20.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 Total 20.00 20.00 6,000.00 6,000.00
6. Section 62(2) of the GST Act stipulates that any order passed under Section 62, would be deemed to have been withdrawn once necessary returns are filed within the period stipulated under the said provision. In the event of delay, late fee is required to be paid by the registered person who seeks to file the said returns.
7. In the present case, petitioner is said to have paid the necessary late fee. In such circumstances, it would have to be deemed that the orders, detailed above, passed under Section 62 of the GST Act are deemed to have been withdrawn.
8. Further, similar issue has fallen for consideration before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras (Madurai Bench) in Writ Petition (MD) No.18740 of 2024 and after considering the same, the High Court of Madras had held that in view of the amendment to Section 62(2) of the Act, it would be appropriate to condone the delay in filing GSTR 3-B returns and consequently the Assessment Order would have to be deemed to be withdrawn.
9. Further, this Court following the judgment rendered by Hon’ble High Court of Madras, allowed W.P.No.20705 of 2025 filed by M/s. Brothers Engineering and Errectors Limited Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh. In such circumstances, the benefit under Section 62(2) of the Act has to be extended to the petitioner as well.
10. Accordingly, Writ Petition is allowed. Assessment Order under challenge passed under Section 62 of the Act is deemed to have been withdrawn and no steps for recovery can be initiated or continued for recovery of the taxes and dues raised under the said order of assessment. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Date:28.09.2026 KS
Dated:28.09.2026.
KS