The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the GST proceedings by both centre and state for the same period amounts to double taxation.

The bench of Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Justice Challa Gunaranjan has observed that parallel proceedings initiated by the  Commissioner of GST and Central Excise Chennai South and Assistant Commissioner (ST), Penamaluru Circle is a case of double taxation, levied on the petitioner, for the same periods of the assessment. Such a course of action would be clearly impermissible.

The petitioner/assessee is a registered person and the assessments in relation to the petitioner were to be carried out by the State authority. However, the Additional Director, DGGI, Chennai Zonal Unit had initiated proceedings against the petitioner, for the period July-2017 to December-2021, on the issue of misclassification of parottas by the petitioner and the non-payment of appropriate tax by the petitioner. 

These proceedings, initiated under the show-cause notice culminated in an Order-in-original  passed by the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise Chennai South. The appeal filed by the petitioner against this order was dismissed by way of an order-in-appeal, dated 29.02.2024.

The petitioner had approached the High Court of Madras by way of writ petition, which is pending.

In parallel proceedings, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Penamaluru Circle, initiated assessment proceedings against the petitioner for the financial year 2019 & 2020 and passed an Order of assessment, dated 27.08.2024, against the petitioner. 

Aggrieved by the Order, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of W.P.No.21702

of 2024. Similarly, the Assistant Commissioner ST, Penamaluru Circle had initiated assessment proceedings for the financial year 2020-2021, which culminated in an order-in-original dated 25.02.2025.

The High Court set aside the order and at the same time left it open to the department to pursue their claims before the Madras High Court, where the matter is pending. No order as to costs was passed.

Case Details

Case Title:  Id Fresh Food(India) Private Limited Versus  Assistant Commissioner ST

Case No.: Writ Petition Nos. 21702 Of 2024 & 12294 Of 2025

Date: 10/09/2025

Counsel For  Petitioner:  Lakshmi Kumaran Sridharan

Counsel For Respondent: Santhi Chandra (Sr. Standing Counsel For Cbic)

Read More: GST ITC Allowed On Steel Reinforcements Of Factory Expansion For Manufacturing Activity: AAR