M/S Naidu Hotel vs. Superintendent Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
APHC010175392026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3529] WEDNE AY, THE FIFTEENTH 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: 9716/2026 Between:
M/S NAIDU HOTEL,, REPRESENTED BY THE PROPRIETOR SRI VALAPANENI KARIBASANAIDU, DOOR NO 7-279, COURT ROAD, NEW TOWN, ANANTAPURAMU, ANANTAPURAMU,I ANDHRA PRADESH. PIN -515001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, ANANTAPUR CGST RANGE- 2, DOOR NO 28-999, 3RD FLOOR, GST BHAVAN, BESIDE MONTESSORI SCHOOL, SANGAMESH NAGAR, ANANTAPUR PIN 515001. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI - PIN 110 001. ...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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, setting aside the common composite show-cause Notice and its summary in Form GST DRC-01 both dated 22-05- 2025, the composite common orders in-original No 02/2025 (GST)(SUPDT)
dated 01-10- 2025 and its claimed 5 summariesin Form GST DRC-07 dated 01-10-2025 issued under the Section 74 of the CGST Acts, 2017, the APGST Acts, 2017 and the IGST Act, 2017 for the 5 years from 2018-19 to 2022-23 and the arrear Notice dated 19- 1-2026 issued by the Respondent No 1 and to pass such 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 stay the collection of the disputed output tax of Rs.15,91,098 and the penalty of Rs.15,91,098 and the unquantified interest in the interest of Justice, lest the Petitioner will be put to irreparable economic loss. The disputed levies of tax and penalty have rho legs to stand. The balance of convenience is clearly in favour of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner:
J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
The Court made the following:
The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Heard Sri J. N. Venkata Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Santhi Chandra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with a show-cause notice, dated 22.05.2025, in FORM GST DRC – 01, passed by the 1st respondent. This show-cause notice covers the period from April, 2018 - March, 2023. 3. The petitioner, after having raised various grounds of challenge, has pressed the ground that, a single show-cause notice or a single assessment order passed, for more than one financial year, would be violative of the provisions of Section 73 and Section 74 of the G.S.T. Act, 2017, and consequently, set aside the orders of assessment/appeals.
A Division Bench of this Court, in W.P.No.11028 of 2025 & batch, after considering the said question, had held that, a single show-cause notice or a single composite assessment order, cannot be passed, in relation to more than one tax period of either a month if the assessment is taken up before the due date for filing of the annual return or for more than one year if the due date for filing of annual return has been reached.
The petitioner has raised various grounds of challenge. However, the petitioner is pressing the primary ground of the order being a composite order.
In that view of the matter, the present Writ Petition is being disposed of, on this ground of challenge, leaving open the other grounds of challenge.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the show-cause notice, dated 22.05.2025, and the assessment order, dated 01.10.2025, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings, for each assessment year separately.
Needless to say, the period from the date of passing of the assessment order till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
_________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J
Date:15.04.2026 KBN THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.9716 of 2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
2026
KBN
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.