RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 1 APHC010074642023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 3675/2023 Between: 1.M/S. AKR CONSTRUCTION LIMITED,, HAVING OFFICE AT 8-2-684/J3, 1ST FLOOR, BHAVANI NAGAR COLONY, KANAKADURGA TEMPLE LANE, ROAD NO. 12, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD - 34. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR A.KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. SUNDERA RAMI REDDY ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST., A.P. 2.THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE COMMERCIAL TAX, 12-468-4, ADJACENT TO NH-16, SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLY, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 3.THE DY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, NELLORE CIRCLE NO. III, NELLORE, NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 2 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 an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents in considering the objections and reply submitted by the Petitioner on dated 05-01-2023 while confirming the assessment order passed by the 3rd Respondent dated 17-11- 2021 through which the 3rd Respondent forfeited the excess TDS amount to a tune of Rs.4,27,60,806/- by invoking Sec 22 (3A) read with Rule 18(3) (b) of APVAT Act 2005 and subsequent penalties as illegal, arbitrary, high handed, without authority of law and jurisdiction, hopelessly time barred and in utter violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased grant stay of all further proceedings including recovery proceedings through coercive methods in pursuance of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 17-11-2021 in A.O. NO. ZH3711210D85360 and the notices of forfeiture and penalty dated 19-11-2021 for the period 2015-16 to 2017-18, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to receive the counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 3 IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to grant leave to the Petitioner for filing the Reply in W.P. No. 3675 of 2023 for proper adjudication of the matter in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to hear the present Writ Petition on an expedited basis, taking into consideration the urgency involved, the grave financial hardship being suffered by the Petitioner, and the subsisting bank attachment, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVADI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following: RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAO RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.3675 OF 2023 ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar) 1. The present writ petition is filed questioning the inaction of respondent Nos.2 & 3 in considering the objections/reply dated 05.01.2023 to the Assessment Order dated 17.11.2021 passed by the 3rd respondent. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that initially a writ petition vide W.P.No.30212 of 2021 had filed against the assessment order dated 17.11.2021 under which excess TDS of Rs.4,27,60,806/- has been forfeited by invoking Section 22 (3-A) r/w. Rule 18(3)(b) of AP VAT Act, 2005. This Court by order dated 22.12.2021 disposed of the said writ petition directing the petitioner to file appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupati. The operative portion of the order passed by this Court is reproduced hereunder: “5. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court, for the present, is not inclined to interfere, primarily on account of the factual aspects which, in the considered opinion of the Court, Appellate the Deputy RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 5 Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi is more equipped to go into as it would require going through documents and even taking of evidence. Moreover, since the statute itself provides for an appellate forum, the same is meant for giving opportunity to the aggrieved person to have departmental remedy before invoking jurisdiction of the Court and the Court would, thus, not short circuit such statutory forums. In Filtrco’s case (supra), the High Court of Madhya Pradesh had dismissed the writ petition, whereas in the present case, this Court after due consideration, is of the opinion that the petitioner should first approach the Forum of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi in the matter. 6. In the aforesaid background, the writ petition is disposed of observing that the petitioner, if so advised, may avail the remedy available to it by filing an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi. Since the petitioner had moved this Court within the time specified for filing such appeal, in the event an appeal is filed before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi, within three weeks from today, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi, shall consider and decide the same on merits, in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.” The said order has become final. 3. As can be seen from the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the 3rd respondent issued various notices on 10.03.2022, 23.04.2022 and 04.11.2022 for recovery of the amount demanded as per Assessment Order dated 17.11.2021. Despite the same, the petitioner neither paid the amount demanded nor filed appeal as directed by this Court in WP No.30212 of 2021. Upon receipt of those notices, the petitioner made a representation dated 05.01.2023 to the respondent No.2 to drop all further proceedings RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 6 including forfeiture pursuant to Assessment Order 17.11.2021. It is further stated that without considering the representation dated 05.01.2023, the respondents are taking coercive action to recover the amount due from the petitioner as per Assessment Order dated 17.11.2021, questioning the said inaction the present writ petition is filed. 4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner filed writ petition vide W.P.No.30212 of 2021 questioning the Assessment Order dated 17.11.2021. This Court, after hearing the parties was not inclined to entertain and disposed of the same by directing the petitioner to file appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupati. For the reasons best known to the petitioner, it did not file appeal against the Assessment Order. Further, nothing is forthcoming as to why such appeal is not filed. Furthermore, the order passed by this Court in the above writ petition attained finality. Therefore, instead of filing appeal as directed by this Court, the petitioner choose to file representation before the authorities. It is the considered opinion of this Court that the question of consideration of such representation does not arise, unless the assessment order is assailed before appropriate forum. Further, the petitioner ought to have filed an application in RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 7 WP No.30212 of 2021 seeking enlargement of time to file appeal as directed by this Court. In such circumstances, the present writ petition cannot be entertained as the same is not maintainable under law. 5. In view of the above reasons recorded supra, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any shall stand closed. JUSTICE RAO RAGHUNANDAN RAO JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR 26.09.2025 DR RRR,J & TCDS,J WP_3675_2023 8 26 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.3675 OF 2023 Date 26.09.2025 DR