1 NJSJU & 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 PETITION NO: 27970 OF 2026 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 2 NJSJU & TCDS,J W.P.No. 27970 of 2026 Dated 28.09.2026 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: 3 NJSJU & TCDS,J W.P.No. 27970 of 2026 Dated 28.09.2026 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 27970 OF 2026 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 4 NJSJU & TCDS,J W.P.No. 27970 of 2026 Dated 28.09.2026 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, 2023 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 5 NJSJU & TCDS,J W.P.No. 27970 of 2026 Dated 28.09.2026 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 6 NJSJU & TCDS,J W.P.No. 27970 of 2026 Dated 28.09.2026 89 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 27970 OF 2026 Dated:28.09.2026. KS