NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 1 Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : .07.2026 Date of uploading : .07.2026 APHC010406572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3543] MONDAY, THE 6th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.21369/2025 Between: 1. M/S. SREE LAKSHMI VENKATA RAMANA STEEL CORPORATION,, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI KOTA SRINIVAS, S/O KOTA SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT PLOT NO. 185, IRON COMPLEX, BHAVANIPURAM, VIJAYAWADA - 520012, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, BEARING GSTIN 37ADAFS5154L1ZR. 2. SRI KOTA SRINIVAS,, S/O KOTA SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT 76-6-19/1, BHAGAT SINGH STREET, SWATHI THEATRE ROAD, BHAVANIPURAM, VIJAYAWADA (URBAN), VIDYADHARAPURAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520 012. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001. NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 2 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, E- BLOCK, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522503. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, 5TH FLOOR, E- BLOCK, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI - 522503. 4. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, VIJAYAWADA-I DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST), COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, BANDAR ROAD, LABBIPET, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520 010. 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, BHAVANIPURAM CIRCLE, OFFICE OF THE COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, D.NO. 22-2/1-41, SATYASAI COMPLEX, BHAVANIPURAM, VIJAYAWADA - 520012, KRISHNA DISTRICT, 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 to may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in retaining the amount of Rs.1,16,89,769/- (Rupees One Crore Sixteen Lakhs Eighty-Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty-Nine only), which was recovered on 03.08.2024 from the personal savings bank account of the 2nd Petitioner pursuant to an assessment order that has already been set aside and quashed by this Honble Court in W.P. No. 2987 of 2024 dated 12.02.2025, as wholly without authority of law, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 265 and 300A of the Constitution of India, and consequently declare that once the assessment order stood quashed and ceased to exist in the eye of law the Respondents had no jurisdiction to continue to retain the amount recovered thereunder, and further direct the Respondents, jointly and severally, to forthwith refund the said amount of 1,16,89,769/- to the 2nd Petitioner, being the person from whose NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 3 personal account the recovery was effected, together with interest at 9 percentage per annum from 03.08.2024 till the date of actual refund in terms of the proviso to Section 56 of the CGST Act, 2017, and pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. Main prayer was amended as per c.o.dt.25.2.2026 vide I.A.No.1 of 2026 in W.P.No.21369 of 2025. IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 May be pleased to seeking for amendment of main prayer is as, “In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in retaining the amount of ?1,16,89,769/- (Rupees One Crore Sixteen Lakhs Eighty-Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty-Nine only), which was recovered on 03.08.2024 from the personal savings bank account of the 2nd Petitioner pursuant to an assessment order that has already been set aside and quashed by this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No. 2987 of 2024 dated 12.02.2025, as wholly without authority of law, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 265 and 300A of the Constitution of India, and consequently declare that once the assessment order stood quashed and ceased to exist in the eye of law the Respondents had no jurisdiction to continue to retain the amount recovered thereunder, and further direct the Respondents, jointly and severally, to forthwith refund the said amount of ?1,16,89,769/- to the 2nd Petitioner, being the person from whose personal account the recovery was effected, together with interest at 9% per annum from 03.08.2024 till the date of actual refund in terms of the proviso to Section 56 of the COST Act, 2017, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” Instead of “In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Refund Rejection Order dated 01.07.2025 issued in NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 4 Form GST RFD-06 bearing Reference No. ZD370725001380P as illegal, arbitrary, and unsustainable in law, and be pleased to quash and set aside the same for being in violation of Rule 92(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, and Articles 14, 265, and 300Aof the Constitution of India and consequently this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents, jointly and severally, to forthwith process and sanction the refund claim of f1,16,89,769/- (Rupees One Crore Sixteen Lakhs Eighty-Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty-Nine only) made by the Petitioner in Form GST RFD-01 dated 30.03.2025 without any further delay and pay interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of unauthorized recovery (i.e., 03.08.2024) till the date of refund application (30.03.2025); and at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of refund application (i.e., from 30.03.2025) till the actual date of refund, in accordance with the proviso to Section 56 of the CGST Act, 2017 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. VADLAPATLA SAI MALLIK Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following: NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 5 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.21369 OF 2025 ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar) 1. Petitioner a registered dealer under GST Act, had suffered an order of assessment dt.20.10.2023 under Section 64 of the said Act. Pursuant to the said assessment order, a notice dt.16.10.2023 was issued under Section 74(9) of the Act to recover the tax dues. 2. Questioning the said assessment order, petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.2987 of 2024 and the same was allowed by order dt.12.02.2025. While setting aside the impugned assessment order, liberty was afforded to the assessing authority to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a DIN. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that, after disposal of the above writ petition, it had filed refund application under Rule 89 (1) of CGST Rules, 2017 in Form-GST RFD-01 on 30.03.2025 seeking to refund an amount of Rs.1,16,89,769/-, inasmuch as the Tax liability on the petitioner through assessment order dt.20.10.2023 was NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 6 recovered by the respondent authorities on 03.08.2023 and the same was adjusted towards the liability of the petitioner. 3. Upon receipt of the refund application, the 5th respondent issued show cause notice dt.19.06.2025 asking the petitioner to appear before the said authority on 25.06.2025 along with reply, as to why the refund application shall not be rejected. Upon hearing the petitioner, the 5th respondent rejected the refund application by order dt.01.07.2025. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. The 5th respondent filed counter affidavit inter alia contending that there is no illegality in the order under challenge. It was specifically contended that though the petitioner has filed writ petition questioning the assessment order dt.20.10.2023, as there was no interim order in the said writ petition till its disposal, in the process of recovery the dues from the petitioner, the respondent authorities have recovered an amount of Rs.1,16,89,769/- from the account of the partner of the petitioner firm on 03.08.2023 and the same was adjusted towards tax, penalty and interest on 05.08.2024. It was further stated that subsequent to the disposal of the writ petition vide WP No.2987 of 2024, the 5th respondent issued notice under Rule 142(1-A) GST Act, on 25.03.2025 proposing to assess the NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 7 petitioner. It is specifically stated in the counter affidavit that after issuance of the said notice, the petitioner with malafide intention filed refund application on 30.03.2025. The 5th respondent raised various other contentions with regard to the maintainability of the refund application filed by the petitioner apart from merits. 5. During the course of hearing, it is represented by the counsel on either side that subsequent to the issuance of show cause notice, pursuant to order passed by this Court in WP No.2987 of 2024, the assessment of the petitioner was took up again and an order was passed against the petitioner, raising demand of Rs.1.3 crores. The counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the passing of assessment order pursuant to the remanding the matter to the assessing authority after disposal of the writ petition vide W.P.No.2987 of 2024. It is represented by both the counsel that as against the assessment order, the petitioner preferred appeal before the appellate authority and the same is pending adjudication. 6. Having considered the submissions of the counsel on record, it is not in dispute that the petitioner has suffered an order of assessment pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in WP No.2987 of 2024. Further, it is also not in dispute that the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority and the same is NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 8 pending adjudication. In view of the pendency of the appeal, we are not inclined to go into the maintainability or the entitlement of the petitioner to seek refund. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition directing the petitioner to purse the appeal filed before the appellate authority with a request to the said authority to dispose of the appeal as early as possible, more particularly in tune with sub section 13 of Section 107 GST Act. Further, liberty is given to the petitioner to seek refund of the amounts recovered from it, subject to the result of the appeal, pending before the appellate authority. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA ______________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR 06.07.2026 DR Whether the order is:- Speaking Yes/No /Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No /Non-Reportable Yes/No NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_21369_2025 9 181 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.21369 of 2025 Date 06.07.2026 U DR