APHC010589902025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30465/2025 Between: 1. WINGTECH MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., SY NO. 444, 19/12, 394, 388/2, 388/3C, 388/4, 392/18, 392/19, 436/1, 19,390, 399/1, ETC., EMC-II VIKRUTHAMALA VILLAGE, YERPEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATI, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517526 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH, KUNCHANAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522501 ANDHRA PRADESH 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR - 522237 ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR - 522237 ANDHRA PRADESH 4. HSBC BANK, CHENNAI BRANCH, THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER RAJALAKSHMI,NO 5 AND 7, CATHEDRAL ROAD, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI - 600004 TAMIL NADU 2 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.30465 of 2025 5. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, TIRUPATI - III CIRCLE, TIRUPATI FIRST FLOOR - CT COMPLEX, NEW BALAJI COLONY, TIRUPATI - 517501 ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue a Writ or an Order or a Direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus D. Directing the First Respondent to issue Form DRC-23 as prescribed under Rule 159 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, to Third and Fourth Respondent. E. Holding that the gross inaction on the part of First Respondent in not issuing Form DRC-23 as prescribed under rule 159 of the APGST Rules read with section 83 of the APGST Act, is violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GOPU ROHITH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. 3. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS 3 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.30465 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri G. Rohith, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, appearing for the respondents. 2. It may be noted that this is the second round of litigation inasmuch as, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.22461 of 2025, on the ground that the authorities while ostensibly recovering taxes demanded under the order of assessment, dated 02.08.2025, had withdrawn an amount of Rs.170 Crores approx., from the bank account of the petitioner. That Writ Petition had been disposed of by this Court, by an order, dated 03.09.2025, with certain directions. Under these directions, the respondent authorities were to refund the amount so withdrawn from the bank account of the petitioner. As the petitioner had also filed an appeal against the order of assessment, dated 02.08.2025, the respondent authorities were permitted to retain a sum of Rs.25 Crores approx. as a pre- deposit of 10% of the disputed tax, required under Section 107 of the GST Act. A further condition was also imposed that the petitioner would maintain a minimum balance of Rs.220 Crores out of the sale consideration received by the petitioner from the purchaser of its plant and machinery. 3. The petitioner had now approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition, for implementation of the earlier order of this Court, 4 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.30465 of 2025 inasmuch as necessary proceedings for refund of the amount collected from the petitioner was not being done. In the course of proceedings before this Court, the tax authorities had refunded the amounts due to the petitioner after retaining the aforesaid amount of Rs.25 Crores. 4. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, had earlier submitted that the petitioner had not complied with the directions of this Court, to maintain the minimum balance of Rs.220 Crores, and as such the petitioner had defaulted on the condition set out in the earlier order. There appears to be a short-fall of Rs.7.5 Crores. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, would contend that the sale transaction between the petitioner and its purchaser has collapsed on account of the delay caused by the action of the tax authorities and as such the further amounts payable to the petitioner have not been paid by the purchaser. He would submit that the consideration received by the petitioner from its purchaser has been retained in the bank account of the petitioner only and in view of non-payment by the purchaser, the remaining Rs.7.5 Crores could not be retained in the account. 6. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, submits that the respondent authorities would await further deposits, on account of payment of sale proceeds by the purchaser and that such amounts remained in the account of the petitioner. 5 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.30465 of 2025 7. In that view of the matter, nothing further survives in the present Writ Petition and it is accordingly, disposed of, by recording the above facts. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date:07.04.2026 MJA 6 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.30465 of 2025 67 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30465/2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 07.04.2026 MJA