1

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

***

WRIT PETITION NO: 11760/2023

Between:

1. AVANTI FEEDS LIMITED, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT G -

2, CONCORDE APARTMENTS, H. NO. 6 -3-658, SOMAJIGUDA,

HYDERABAD- 500082. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED

SIGNATORY MR. C. RAMACHANDRA RAO, JOINT MANAGING

DIRECTOR

2. MR. A. INDRA KUMAR,, S/O (LATE) A. VENKATESHWAR RAO,

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,

AVANTI FEEDS LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT.G -2, CONCORDE

APARTMENTS, H. NO. 6 -3-658, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD -

500082.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

$1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICE OF THE JOINT

COMMISSIONER (ST), SPECIAL CIRCLE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

DIVISION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICER OF TH E

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATETAX, DOOR NO. 12 -468-4,

ADJACENT TO NH -16, SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLY,

GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 522501.

3. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF

FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW

DELHI - 110001

4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

2

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

Date of Judgment pronounced on : 01-04-2026

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN R AO

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No

May be allowed to see the judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No

to Law Reporters/Journals:

3. Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No

of the Judgment?

3

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

*THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

+ WRIT PETITION No.11760 of 2023

% Dated: 01-04-2026

Between:

1. AVANTI FEEDS LIMITED, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT G -

2, CONCORDE APARTMENTS, H. NO. 6 -3-658, SOMAJIGUDA,

HYDERABAD- 500082. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED

SIGNATORY MR. C. RAMACHANDRA RAO, JOINT MANAGING

DIRECTOR

2. MR. A. INDRA KUMAR,, S/O (LATE) A. VENKATESHWAR RAO,

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,

AVANTI FEEDS LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT.G -2, CONCORDE

APARTMENTS, H. NO. 6 -3-658, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD -

500082.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

$1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICE OF THE JOINT

COMMISSIONER (ST), SPECIAL CIRCLE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

DIVISION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICER OF THE

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATETAX, DOOR NO. 12 -468-4,

ADJACENT TO NH-16, SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLY,

GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 522501.

3. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF

FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW

DELHI - 110001

4

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

! Counsel for the Petitioner :Sri K. Vivek Reddy, learned senior

counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Vimal

Varma Vasi Reddy

^Counsel for Respondents :The earned Government Pleader for

Commercial Taxes

<GIST :

>HEAD NOTE:

? Cases referred:

1

(2021) 95 GSTR 131:2021 SCC Online mad 13910

2

2025 AHC 143407

3

(1998) 8 SCC page 1

4

(2022) 10 SCC 700:(2022) 101 GSTR 262:2022 SCC online SC 657

5

(2023) 156 taxmann.com 448 (Kerala)

6

MANU/SC/0430/2004: AIR 2004 SC 2321

7

MANU/AP/1501/2025

5

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

APHC010223782023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3529]

WEDNESDAY,THE FIRST 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: 11760/2023

Between:

1. AVANTI FEEDS LIMITED, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT G -

2, CONCORDE APARTMENTS, H. NO. 6 -3-658, SOMAJIGUDA,

HYDERABAD- 500082. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED

SIGNATORY MR. C. RAMACHANDRA RAO, JOINT MANAGING

DIRECTOR

2. MR. A. INDRA KUMAR,, S/O (LATE) A. VENKATESHWAR RAO,

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,

AVANTI FEEDS LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT.G -2, CONCORDE

APARTMENTS, H. NO. 6 -3-658, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD -

500082.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICE OF THE JOINT

COMMISSIONER (ST), SPECIAL CIRCLE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

DIVISION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, OFFICER OF THE

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATETAX, DOOR NO. 12 -468-4,

ADJACENT TO NH -16, SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLY,

GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 522501.

6

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

3. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF

FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW

DELHI - 110001

4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...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, Direction or Order, particularly

in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, a.Call for the records pertaining to the

Impugned Notice dated 10 April 2023 bearing Case ID AD371122002279F,

issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 73(5) of the AP GST Act and

quash the same b.Declare that the Impugned Circular No. 80/54/2018 dated

31 December 2018 issued by the Tax Resear ch Unit, Department of

Revenue, under the Respondent No.3, is invalid as it has already been set

aside by the Honourable Madras High Court in Jenefa India v. UOI (Judgment

dated 5 October 2021 in WP No. (MD) No. 16770 to 16776 of 2019), and

cannot be relied upon by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the Impugned

Notice dated 10 April 2023 bearing Case ID AD371122002279F, issued by

Respondent No.1 under Section 73(5) of the AP GST Act and to 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 to dispense with the requirement of filing the certified copies of 1)

Impugned Notice dated 10 April 2023 bearing Case ID AD371122002279F,

issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 73(5) of the AP GST Act and 2)

Impugned Circular No. 80/54/2018 dated 31 December 2018 issued by the

Tax Research Unit, Department of Revenue, under the Respondent No.3,

pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

IA NO: 2 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 to suspend the Impugned Notice dated 10 April 2023 bearing Case

7

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

ID AD371122002279F, issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 73(5) of

the AP GST Act pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

IA NO: 3 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 to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Notice dated

10 April 2023 bearing Case ID AD371122002279F, issued by Respondent

No.1 pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pas

IA NO: 4 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 to Suspend the Operation of the Impugned Circular No. 80/54/2018

dated 31 December 2018, issued by the Tax Research Unit, Department of

Revenue, under the Respondent No.3 pending disposal of the above writ

petition and to pass

IA NO: 5 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 to direct Respondent No.1 not to take any coercive steps in relation to

the Impugned Notice dated 10 April 2023 bearing Case ID

AD371122002279F, issued by Respondent No.1 pendin g disposal of the

above writ petition and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 vacate the interim orders dated 05.05.2023 in WP No. 11760 of

2023 and to pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 concone the delay of 118 days in filing the rejoinder by

permit the petitioners to file their rejoinder to the Vacate stay petition and

counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.1 and pass

8

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

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 permit the Petitioners to file this Additional Affidavit along with

material papers numbered as Annexures P-20 to P-28 in the present Writ

Petition in the interests of justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. VIMAL VARMA VASI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. HARINATH N (DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA))

2. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

3.

Date of Reserved : 23.02.2026

Date of Pronouncement : 01.04.2026

Date of Upload : 01.04.2026

9

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

The Court made the following Order:

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Heard Sri K. Vivek Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf

of Sri Vimal Varma Vasi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the

learned Government Pleader of Commercial Tax, appearing for the

respondents.

2. The first petitioner is a limited Company, which is registered

under the CGST Act and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and

supplying aquatic feed. For the purposes of manufacturing the said aquatic

feed, the 1st petitioner imports certain Inputs, such as fish meal, soya, algal

oil. The petitioner had claimed exemption from payment of tax, under the

IGST Act, in relation to the import of some of these inputs in relation to the

assessment years 2017-18 to 2022-23. It may also be recorded that the 1st

petitioner has been allotted to the Central Jurisdiction and not the State

Jurisdiction.

3. The 1st respondent, Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, on the

basis of an authorization issued by the Joint Commissioner, Sales tax,

Rajamahendravaram, had inspected the business place of the 1st petitioner

on 11.11.2022. Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued an intimation of tax,

ascertained as being payable, under Section 73(5) of the GST Act, read with

Rule 142(1A), on 19.12.2022. In this intimation, the 1st respondent informed

the 1st petitioner that some of the claims, of the 1st petitioner, relating to

10

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

exemption and classification of goods was not correct and sought an

explanation from the 1st petitioner. The claim of the petitioner for exemption

on the supply of Rovimix AVP Mineral, which is an input in the manufacturing

of aquatic feed, in the course of import, and import of fishing meal was also

sought to be disputed. The 1st petitioner, replied to this intimation, by a reply,

dated 12.01.2023. In this reply, the 1st petitioner, replied on the merits of the

issues, raised in the said intimation. Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued a

second intimation, dated 10.04.2023. This Intimation, which is in the form of a

show cause notice has been challenged, along with Circular No.80/54/2018-

GST, dated 31.12.2018, issued by the Tax Revenue Unit, Department of

Revenue, which denied the benefit of exemption given by the Central

Government under an exemption Notification issued under Section 6(1) of the

IGST Act.

4. The case of the petitioners, as reiterated by Sri K. Vivek Reddy,

learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of Sri Vimal Varma Vasi Reddy,

learned counsel for the petitioner is as follows:

i) It is the admitted case of the 1st respondent that the 1st petitioner

has been allocated to the Central Jurisdiction. As such no State GST authority

can initiate any proceedings against the 1st petitioner;

11

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

ii) The IGST Act read with the relevant provisions of the Constitution of

India bar any State Authority, under the GST Acts, to initiate, continue or

complete any proceedings under the IGST Act;

iii) Section 2(3) and Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the

proviso to Section 5(1) of the IGST Act makes it clear that the jurisdiction to

assess the IGST payable, in the course of import of goods, into India, vests

solely with the authorities under the Customs Act and no authority under any

of the GST Acts can undertake such an exercise;

iv) Circular No. 80/54/2018-GST, dated 31.12.2018, is ultra vires the

exemption notification, under Section 6(1) of the IGST Act as the said circular

imposes conditions which were not envisaged in the exemption Notification

Issued under Section 6(1) of the IGST Act. Further, the said Circular had

already been set aside by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in Jenefa India

vs. Union of India

1

, by a Judgment dated 05.10.2021 in W.P(MP) 16770 to

16776 of 2019.

5. The learned Senior Counsel would also contend that various

issues which had not been raised in the intimation, dated 19.12.2022, have

been raised in the fresh intimation, dated 10.04.2023, and the same is not

permissible.

1

(2021) 95 GSTR 131:2021 SCC Online mad 13910

12

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

6. The 1st respondent had filed a counter affidavit. In this counter

affidavit, it is submitted that the Writ Petition itself is not maintainable as it has

been filed against the show cause notice, without exhausting the remedy of

approaching the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent relying upon Section 6 of

the APGST Act contends that the officers, under the APGST Act are

authorised, by virtue of Section 6, to issue any orders or proceedings under

the CGST Act and such cross empowerment has been discussed by the GST

Council in its 9th meeting on 16.01.2017 wherein it was decided that no

separate notification is required for authorities under the State GST Acts to

exercise powers conferred on Central Tax Officers.

7. The 1st respondent, on the basis of Section 6 would further

contend that the notification issued by the Chief Commissioner of Commercial

Tax, dated 30.06.2017, authorizes the 1st respondent to take up assessment

in relation to the 1st petitioner, even under the IGST Act. The 1st respondent

has also set out the case of the 1st respondent, on the merits of the case.

8. The learned Government pleader has filed written submissions. In

these submissions, the learned government pleader has sought to argue on

the merits of the case. As this court is on the question of jurisdiction, these

contentions are not being considered. The learned government pleader, on

the question of jurisdiction, would contend that Section 6 of the APGST Act,

cross empowers all officers under the APGST Act, to discharge functions

under the CGST and IGST Acts. He relies upon an office memorandum, dated

13

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

30.06.2017, issued by the joint secretary of the GST Council, clarifying that

officers under one Act can take action against tax payers, even in relation to

proceedings under the other GST Acts. He would also rely upon the judgment

of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad, in Shree Maa Trading Company and

two Ors., Vs. State of U.P and three Ors

2

. Apart from the above, a further

contention is raised. The 1

st

Respondent had initiated proceedings on

12.12.2022, while the Customs authorities had initiated proceedings, only on

08.08.2025. Thus, the action of the 1

st

respondent is not a parallel proceeding

initiated after the customs proceedings had been initiated.

Consideration of the Court:

8. The preliminary issue, before this Court, is on the maintainability

of the writ petition. In the normal course, this Court would not interfere, at the

stage of a show cause notice unless it is demonstrated that the show cause

notice itself is wholly without jurisdiction. The Judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks,

Mumbai and Ors.,

3

relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel, for the

petitioners, sets out the above principle. In the circumstances, this Court

would have to first go into the issue of whether the show cause notice has

been issued by an officer who has jurisdiction.

2

2025 AHC 143407

3

(1998) 8 SCC page 1

14

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

9. The contentions of the learned Senior Counsel, are twofold.

Firstly, no officer, under the GST regime, can exercise any power or authority,

for assessing or collecting IGST, in relation to import of goods, and such

power can be exercised, only by an officer, under the Customs Act, 1962.

Secondly, an officer, under the APGST Act, cannot exercise any power or

function, under the IGST Act.

10. The IGST Act has been enacted for taxing Inter State supply of

services and goods and supply of services or goods imported into India or

exported out of India. A reading of Section 7 of the IGST Act, extracted below,

makes it clear.

Section 7. Inter-State supply.

(1) Subject to the provisions of section 10, supply of goods, where

the location of the supplier and the place of supply are in---

(a) two different States;

(b) two different Union territories; or

(c) a State and a Union territory,

shall be treated as a supply of goods in the course of inter-State

trade or commerce.

(2) Supply of goods imported into the territory of India, till they cross

the customs frontiers of India, shall be treated to be a supply of

goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce.

(3) Subject to the provisions of section 12, supply of services, where

the location of the supplier and the place of supply are in---

(a) two different States; or

(b) two different Union territories; or

15

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

(c) a State and a Union territory, shall be treated as a supply of

services in the course of inter-State trade or commerce.

(4) Supply of services imported into the territory of India shall be

treated to be a supply of services in the course of inter-State trade

or commerce.

(5) Supply of goods or services or both,---

(a) when the supplier is located in India and the place of supply

is outside India;

(b) to or by a Special Economic Zone developer or a Special

Economic Zone unit; or

(c) in the taxable territory, not being an intra-State supply and

not covered elsewhere in this section, shall be treated to be a

supply of goods or services or both in the course of inter-State

trade or commerce.

11. The levy of collection of Tax, on such Inter-State supply of

goods of goods or services is set out in Section 5 of the IGST Act. Section

5(1), which is relevant to this case, is set out below:

5. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), there shall

be levied a tax called the integrated goods and services tax

on all inter-State supplies of goods or services or both;

except on the supply of alcoholic liquor for human

consumption, on the value determined under section 15 of

the Central Goods and Services Tax Act and at such rates,

not exceeding forty per cent., as may be notified by the

Government on the recommendations of the Council and

collected in such manner as may be prescribed and shall be

paid by the taxable person:

16

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

Provided that the integrated tax on goods imported into India

shall be levied and collected in accordance with the

provisions of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on the

value as determined under the said Act at the point when

duties of customs are levied on the said goods under section

12 of the Customs Act, 1962.

12. The Proviso to Section 5(1) stipulates that IGST, on the supply

of goods, which are imported into India, are to be levied and collected as set

out in section 3 of the Customs Act, 1975, on the value determined under the

Customs Act, at the point where customs duties are levied on such goods,

under Section 12 of the Customs Act.

13. Section 12 of the Customs Act states that duties of customs shall

be levied at such rates as may be specified under the Customs Tariff Act or

any other law for time being in force, on goods imported into or exported from

India. Another relevant provision is Section 2(2) of the Customs Act, 1962,

which defines assessment in the following manner:

Section 2[(2) ―”assessment” means determination of the dutiability

of any goods and the amount of duty, tax, cess or any other sum so

payable, if any, under this Act or under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975

(51 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Customs Tariff Act) or

under any other law for the time being in force, with reference to—

(a) the tariff classification of such goods as determined in accordance

with the provisions of the Customs Tariff Act;

(b) the value of such goods as determined in accordance with the

provisions of this Act and the Customs Tariff Act;

17

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

(c) exemption or concession of duty, tax, cess or any other sum,

consequent upon any notification issued therefor under this Act or

under the Customs Tariff Act or under any other law for the time

being in force;

(d) the quantity, weight, volume, measurement or other specifics

where such duty, tax, cess or any other sum is leviable on the basis

of the quantity, weight, volume, measurement or other specifics of

such goods;

(e) the origin of such goods determined in accordance with the

provisions of the Customs Tariff Act or the rules made thereunder, if

the amount of duty, tax, cess or any other sum is affected by the

origin of such goods;

(f) any other specific factor which affects the duty, tax, cess or any

other sum payable on such goods, and includes provisional

assessment, self-assessment, re-assessment and any assessment in

which the duty assessed is nil;]

14. Apart from the definition of assessment, this Court would also

have to notice Section 28 of the Customs Act which reads as follows:

Section 28. Recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-

levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded.

28. Recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or

short-paid or erroneously refunded.—

(1) Where any duty has not been levied or not paid or short-levied

or short-paid or erroneously refunded, or any interest payable has

not been paid, part-paid or erroneously refunded, for any reason

other than the reasons of collusion or any wilful mis-statement or

suppression of facts, --

18

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

(a) the proper officer shall, within two years from the relevant

date, serve notice on the person chargeable with the duty or

interest which has not been so levied [or paid] or which has been

short-levied or short-paid or to whom the refund has erroneously

been made, requiring him to show cause why he should not pay

the amount specified in the notice:

[Provided that before issuing notice, the proper officer shall

hold pre-notice consultation with the the person chargeable with

duty or interest in such manner as may be prescribed;]

(b) the person chargeable with the duty or interest, may pay

before service of notice under clause (a) on the basis of, --

(i) his own ascertainment of such duty; or

(ii) the duty ascertained by the proper officer,

the amount of duty along with the interest payable thereon

under section 28AA or the amount of interest which has not

been so paid or part-paid.

[Provided that the proper officer shall not serve such show

cause notice, where the amount involved is less than rupees

one hundred.]

(2) The person who has paid the duty along with interest or

amount of interest under clause (b) of sub-section (1) shall inform

the proper officer of such payment in writing, who, on receipt of

such information, shall not serve any notice under clause (a) of

that sub-section in respect of the duty or interest so paid or any

penalty leviable under the provisions of this Act or the rules made

thereunder in respect of such duty or interest:

[Provided that where notice under clause (a) of sub-

section (1) has been served and the proper officer is of the opinion

that the amount of duty along with interest payable thereon under

19

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

section 28AA or the amount of interest, as the case may be, as

specified in the notice, has been paid in full within thirty days from

the date of receipt of the notice, no penalty shall be levied and the

proceedings against such person or other persons to whom the

said notice is served under clause (a) of sub-section (1) shall be

deemed to be concluded.]

(3) Where the proper officer is of the opinion that the amount paid

under clause (b) of sub-section (1) falls short of the amount

actually payable, then, he shall proceed to issue the notice as

provided for in clause (a) of that sub-section in respect of such

amount which falls short of the amount actually payable in the

manner specified under that sub-section and the period of two

years shall be computed from the date of receipt of information

under sub-section (2).

(4) Where any duty has not been levied or not paid or has been

short-levied or short-paid] or erroneously refunded, or interest

payable has not been paid, part-paid or erroneously refunded, by

reason of,--

(a) collusion; or

(b) any wilful mis-statement; or

(c) suppression of facts,

by the importer or the exporter or the agent or employee of

the importer or exporter, the proper officer shall, within five

years from the relevant date, serve notice on the person

chargeable with duty or interest which has not been so levied

or not paid or which has been so short-levied or short-paid or

to whom the refund has erroneously been made, requiring

him to show cause why he should not pay the amount

specified in the notice.

20

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

(5) Where any duty has not been levied or not paid or has been

short-levied or short paid] or the interest has not been charged or

has been part-paid or the duty or interest has been erroneously

refunded by reason of collusion or any wilful mis-statement or

suppression of facts by the importer or the exporter or the agent or

the employee of the importer or the exporter, to whom a notice has

been served under sub- section (4) by the proper officer, such

person may pay the duty in full or in part, as may be accepted by

him, and the interest payable thereon under section 28AA and the

penalty equal to fifteen per cent of the duty specified in the notice

or the duty so accepted by that person, within thirty days of the

receipt of the notice and inform the proper officer of such payment

in writing.

(6) Where the importer or the exporter or the agent or the

employee of the importer or the exporter, as the case may be, has

paid duty with interest and penalty under sub-section (5), the

proper officer shall determine the amount of duty or interest and on

determination, if the proper officer is of the opinion –

(i) that the duty with interest and penalty has been paid in

full, then, the proceedings in respect of such person or other

persons to whom the notice is served under sub -

section (1) or sub- section (4), shall, without prejudice to the

provisions of sections 135, 135A and 140 be deemed to be

conclusive as to the matters stated therein; or

(ii) that the duty with interest and penalty that has been paid

falls short of the amount actually payable, then, the proper

officer shall proceed to issue the notice as provided for in

clause (a) of sub-section (1) in respect of such amount which

falls short of the amount actually payable in the manner

specified under that sub-section and the period of two years

21

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

shall be computed from the date of receipt of information

under sub-section (5).

(7) In computing the period of two years referred to in clause (a) of

sub-section (1) or five years referred to in sub-section (4), the

period during which there was any stay by an order of a court or

tribunal in respect of payment of such duty or interest shall be

excluded.

(7A) Save as otherwise provided in clause (a) of sub-section (1) or

in sub-section (4), the proper officer may issue a supplementary

notice under such circumstances and in such manner as may be

prescribed, and the provisions of this section shall apply to such

supplementary notice as if it was issued under the said sub-

section (1) or sub-section (4).

(8) The proper officer shall, after allowing the concerned person an

opportunity of being heard and after considering the

representation, if any, made by such person, determine the

amount of duty or interest due from such person not being in

excess of the amount specified in the notice.

(9) The proper officer shall determine the amount of duty or

interest under sub-section (8),--

(a) within six months from the date of notice, in respect of

cases falling under clause (a) of sub- section (1);

(b) within one year from the date of notice, in respect of

cases falling under sub-section (4).

[Provided that where the proper officer fails to so determine

within the specified period, any officer senior in rank to the

proper officer may, having regard to the circumstances under

22

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

which the proper officer was prevented from determining the

amount of duty or interest under sub-section (8), extend the

period specified in clause (a) to a further period of six

months and the period specified in clause (b) to a further

period of one year:

Provided further that where the proper officer fails to

determine within such extended period, such proceeding

shall be deemed to have concluded as if no notice had been

issued;]

(9A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (9), where

the proper officer is unable to determine the amount of duty or

interest under sub-section (8) for the reason that—

(a) an appeal in a similar matter of the same person or any other

person is pending before the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court

or the Supreme Court; or

(b) an interim order of stay has been issued by the Appellate

Tribunal or the High Court or the Supreme Court; or

(c) the Board has, in a similar matter, issued specific direction or

order to keep such matter pending; or

(d) the Settlement Commission has admitted an application made

by the person concerned, the proper officer shall inform the person

concerned the reason for non-determination of the amount of duty

or interest under sub-section (8) and in such case, the time

specified in sub-section (9) shall apply not from the date of notice,

but from the date when such reason ceases to exist.]

(10) Where an order determining the duty is passed by the proper

officer under this section, the person liable to pay the said duty

shall pay the amount so determined along with the interest due on

23

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

such amount whether or not the amount of interest is specified

separately.

(10A) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where an

order for refund under sub-section (2) of section 27 is modified in

any appeal and the amount of refund so determined is less than

the amount refunded under said sub-section, the excess amount

so refunded shall be recovered along with interest thereon at the

rate fixed by the Central Government under section 28AA, from

the date of refund up to the date of recovery, as a sum due to the

Government.

(10B) A notice issued under sub-section (4) shall be deemed to

have been issued under sub-section (1), if such notice demanding

duty is held not sustainable in any proceeding under this Act,

including at any stage of appeal, for the reason that the charges of

collusion or any wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts to

evade duty has not been established against the person to whom

such notice was issued and the amount of duty and the interest

thereon shall be computed accordingly.

(11) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any

judgment, decree or order of any court of law, tribunal or other

authority, all persons appointed as officers of Customs under sub-

section (1) of section 4 before the 6th day of July, 2011 shall be

deemed to have and always had the power of assessment under

section 17 and shall be deemed to have been and always had

been the proper officers for the purposes of this section.

24

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

15. The proviso to Section 5(1) was considered by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Another vs. Mohit

Minerals Private Limited

4

.

The proviso to Section 5(1) of the IGST Act clarifies that the

tax is levied on goods imported into India, in accordance with

Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The value is determined

under the Customs Tariff Act at the point when the customs duties

are levied in accordance with the Customs Act.

16. Section 2(2) stipulates that assessment, under the Customs Act,

would not only include, the determination of the duty, tax or other sums under

the Customs Act or the Customs Tariff Act, but would also include the

determination of such taxes, etc, in relation to any other law, where such

liability is to be determined, with reference to the provisions of the Customs

Tariff Act or under any notification issued under the Customs Act. In the

present case, the rate of IGST and the quantum of IGST payable on the

supply of goods, in the course of import of such goods, is to be done on the

basis of the provisions of the Customs Tariff Act. Consequently, the

assessment, for the purpose of IGST Act, would have to be conducted by the

customs authorities and not the authorities under the IGST Act. This

interpretation would not render the authorities, under the IGST Act, without

any function at all. The said officers and authorities would still be necessary

for assessing and collecting IGST on the movement of goods within India. The

4

(2022) 10 SCC 700:(2022) 101 GSTR 262:2022 SCC online SC 657

25

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

provisions of Section 2(2) and Section 28 were considered by the Hon’ble

High Court of Kerala in the case of Ajwa Dry Fruit Impex vs Union of India

5

.

The learned single Judge of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala after considering

similar issues, had held as follows:

6. Mr. Ajoy P. B., Learned Counsel for the Revenue opposed the

contention of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that Sub-

section (2) of Section 2 defines the assessment order. If the

definition of assessment order is considered, it is not confined only

to the Customs duty but, it is in respect of every duty, cess or tax

which is applicable on the imported goods. Therefore, the

contentions raised by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that

the impugned Exhibit P-1 assessment order passed under Section

28 is without jurisdiction has no substance. Learned Counsel for

the respondents has also placed reliance on the case of Canon

India Private Limited (M/s.) v. Commissioner of Customs (2021

KHC 6151) in support of his contention to say that the assessing

authority under the provisions of Section 28 is empowered to

assess evasion/non payment of not only Customs duty but, any

other tax, cess levied or duty on which imported goods attract.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submits that this is a

question of classification of the goods and therefore instead of

filing the petition, the petitioner ought to have been approached

the appellate authority against the said order.

7. I have considered the submissions. This Court is required to

consider whether the order impugned in Exhibit P-1 is without

jurisdiction and void ab initio. Sub-section (2) to Section 2 of the

Customs Act, 1962 defines the assessment order which reads as

under; "assessment" means determination of the dutiability of any

goods and the amount of duty, tax, cess or any other sum so

5

(2023) 156 taxmann.com 448 (Kerala)

26

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

payable, if any, under this Act or under the Customs Tariff Act,

1975 (51 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Customs Tariff

Act) or under any other law for the time being in force, with

reference to-

(a) the tariff classification of such goods as determined in

accordance with the provisions of the Customs Tariff Act;

(b) the value of such goods as determined in accordance

with the provisions of this Act and the Customs Tariff Act;

(c) exemption or concession of duty, tax, cess or any other

sum, consequent upon any notification issued therefor under this

Act or under the Customs Tariff Act or under any other law for the

time being in force;

(d) the quantity, weight, volume, measurement or other

specifics where such duty, tax, cess or any other sum is leviable

on the basis of the quantity, weight, volume, measurement or other

specifics of such goods;

(e) the origin of such goods determined in accordance with

the provisions of the Customs Tariff Act or the rules made

thereunder, if the amount of duty, tax, cess or any other sum is

affected by the origin of such goods;

(f) any other specific factor which affects the duty, tax, cess or

any other sum payable on such goods, and includes provisional

assessment, self-assessment, re-assessment and any

assessment in which the duty assessed is nil.”

8. Sub-section (15) of Section 2 defines duty which means

customs duty. Section 28 empowers the assessing authority to

assess and recover the duties not levied, not paid, short levied or

short paid or erroneously refunded. Section 28 therefore is not

only in respect of duty which means customs duty but, it is in

respect of duties which may be applicable on imported item/goods.

27

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

Even otherwise, the assessment order is defined under Sub-

section 2 of Section 2 of the Customs Act empowers the assessing

authority to determine the dutiability of any goods and the amount

of duty/tax, cess or any sum so payable under the Customs Act or

Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) or under any other law for

the time being in force, with reference to exemption or concession

of duty, tax, cess or any other sum, consequent upon any

notification issued therefor under the said Act or under the

Customs Tariff Act or under any other law for the time being in

force.17. In these circumstances, the question of whether an

authority under the State GST Act is cross empowered under the

provisions of Section 6 of the APGST Act, would not arise as the

entire process of assessment and recovery of tax, set out in

Section 2(2) read with section 28 of the Customs Act, is conferred

solely on the customs authorities.

17. Another aspect of this matter which would also require to be

noticed is the language of the proviso to Section 5(1). The said integrated tax

would be levied and collected at the point when duties of customs are levied.

In a large number of cases, customs duties would be levied and collected at

the point of import. An officer under the State GST Act or the Central GST Act,

who has been notified as the proper officer, situated in a State, which is not

the entry point, of the goods, into India, would not be able to exercise

jurisdiction at the point of entry of goods. Such jurisdiction can obviously be

exercised only by the customs officers under the Customs Act.

18. In such circumstances, the inevitable conclusion, as to the

authority who can levy and collect integrated tax, on goods being imported

28

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

into India, for supply of such goods can only be the customs officers under the

Customs Act.

19. In the present case, another factor that needs to be noticed is the

proceedings which have been initiated by the customs authorities under the

Customs Act, by way of a notice, dated 24.01.2024. These proceedings

culminated in an order dated, 08.08.2025, in which the Commissioner of

Customs while accepting the contention of the 1st petitioner that the Rovimix

AVP products, imported by the petitioner are eligible for exemption, had also

held that the assessment and payment of IGST on imported goods would fall

within the jurisdiction of the customs officers only. As already held by this

Court, the jurisdiction to levy assess and collected integrated tax, on goods

imported for the purpose of supply of such goods in India, would vest only with

the customs authorities. In view of the proceedings initiated by customs

authorities, it could not have been appropriate, even otherwise, for the 1st

respondent to continue proceedings under the IGST Act.

20. The second issue, before this court, is whether an officer

appointed under the APGST Act, can exercise jurisdiction, under the IGST

Act, even in relation to those tax payers who have been allotted to the Centre?

21. Section 6 of the CGST Act, Section 6 of the APGST Act and

Section 4 of the IGST Act, which read as follows, provide for cross

empowerment:

29

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

Section 6. Authorisation of officers of State tax or Union

territory tax as proper officer in certain circumstances.

(1) Without prejudice to the provisions of this Act, the officers

appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the

Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act are authorised to

be the proper officers for the purposes of this Act, subject to

such conditions as the Government shall, on the

recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify.

(2) Subject to the conditions specified in the notification issued

under sub-section (1),--

(a) where any proper officer issues an order under this

Act, he shall also issue an order under the State Goods

and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and

Services Tax Act, as authorised by the State Goods

and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and

Services Tax Act, as the case may be, under intimation

to the jurisdictional officer of State tax or Union territory

tax;

(b) where a proper officer under the State Goods and

Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and

Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a

subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by the

proper officer under this Act on the same subject

matter.

(3) Any proceedings for rectification, appeal and revision,

wherever applicable, of any order passed by an officer

appointed under this Act shall not lie before an officer appointed

under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union

Territory Goods and Services Tax Act.

30

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

Section 4, of the IGST Act, reads as follows:

Section 4. Authorisation of officers of State tax or Union

territory tax as proper officer in certain circumstances.

Without prejudice to the provisions of this Act, the officers

appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or

the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act are

authorised to be the proper officers for the purposes of this

Act, subject to such exceptions and conditions as the

Government shall, on the recommendations of the Council,

by notification, specify.

22. The issue of cross empowerment has been considered and

answered by this court, in W.P.No.541 of 2026 and batch. This Court has

held, in those writ petitions, that Section 6 of the CGST Act and Section 4 of

the IGST Act, would empower an officer, under the APGST Act, to act under

the CGST and IGST Acts, only if the tax payer has been allotted,

administratively, to the State of Andhra Pradesh and such officer is the proper

officer for such tax payer. In the present case, the petitioner has been,

administratively, allotted to the Central Government. Therefore, the 1

st

respondent cannot claim the benefit of cross empowerment, under section 4

of the IGST Act, to assume jurisdiction, in the present case.

23. Before parting with this Writ Petition, it would also be

necessary for this Court, to notice the fact that the Hon'ble High Court of

Madras had already struck down Circular No.80/54/2018-GST, dated

31.12.2018. In view of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

31

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

case of Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd., vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors

6

, a

circular, a notification, or legislation, which has been struck down by any High

Court, would effectively result in the said legislation becoming inoperative

across India and the legislation would have to be deemed to struck down in

relation to the entire country. In such circumstances, there is no further need

for this Court to strike down the said circular again.

24. As this Court has held that the intimation of 10.04.2023 is without

jurisdiction, the petitioners would succeed and this Writ Petition is allowed,

setting aside the impugned notice dated, 10.04.2024, as far as the said notice

deals with the exemption claimed by the petitioner in relation to goods which

have been imported to India. As far as the remaining turnovers and issues

raised by the 1st respondent are concerned, the same would also have to be

set aside on the ground that the said show cause notice relates to multiple

years and such a show cause notice is not permissible, in view of the

judgment of this Court in S.J Constructions vs. The Assistant

Commissioner and Ors

7

.

25. The above order, would not, however, preclude the relevant

authorities to take up assessment or other proceedings, under the relevant

Acts, in case such authorities of the opinion that the petitioner is under further

6

MANU/SC/0430/2004: AIR 2004 SC 2321

7

MANU/AP/1501/2025

32

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

liability, to pay tax, for the import of the goods, mentioned above or in relation

to any other liability.

26. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order

as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

_______________________________

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

____________________

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

RJS

33

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

&

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION No: 11760 of 2023

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)

01.04.2026

RJS

34

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.11760 of 2023