M/S. Batchu Venkateswara Reddy vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Fac

The petitioner herein has approached this Court, challenging the order of assessment, dated 19.04.2023, in relation to the assessment years 2020-21 and 2021-22. The said Writ Petition came to be filed on two grounds. Firstly, that the said order was a composite order in relation to the assessment years 2020-21 and 2021-22. The second ground raised by the petitioner was that no summary of the order, for the assessment year 2020-21, had been passed and the summary of the order for the assessment year 2021-22 had wrongly shown the amounts assessed for the assessment year 2020-21. 3. A perusal of the proceedings, placed before this Court, would show that a show-cause notice was initially issued to the petitioner for the assessment years 2020-21 and 2021-22. The proper officer, after considering the objections filed by the petitioner, had essentially accepted the returns of the petitioner for the period 2021-22. However, the proper officer did not accept the returns of the petitioner for the assessment period 2020-21 and raised an additional demand of Rs.9,72,716/- towards the tax, which remained unpaid. Apart from this, the proper officer also sought interest of Rs.3,48,738/- and penalty of Rs.4,86,358/-, being 50% of the tax, if such penalty was paid within 30 days time from the date of receipt of the order. The proper officer also raised an additional penalty of Rs.9,72,716/- if the penalty of Rs.4,86,358/- was not paid within 30 days time from the date of receipt of the order.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had paid the taxes, interest and penalty within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order and as such the petitioner was only required to pay Rs.4,86,358/- as penalty and not Rs.9,72,716/- as penalty. The learned counsel also contends that these amounts were not payable and raised various grounds on the merits of the case. This Court is not inclined to go into these questions as these are issues which are best dealt with by the Appellate Authority.

The first contention of the petitioner was that the summary of the order, dated 19.04.2023, for the assessment year 2020-21, was not issued at all and that the summary of the order, for the assessment year 2021-22, is incorrect as it is actually the summary of the assessment order for the year 2020-21. 6. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, has today, placed before this Court the summary of the order, in Form GST DRC- 07, dated 28.03.2026, for the assessment year 2020-21. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that there was a typographical error in the earlier summary of the order and the year 2021-22 was typed by mistake instead of the year 2020-21. 7. In view of the issuance of a fresh summary of the order, dated 28.03.2026, it would have to be held that the earlier summary of the order, for the year 2021-22, has been withdrawn and that the fresh summary of the order, dated 28.03.2026, would be the appropriate order for the assessment year 2020-21. 8. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the order of assessment, dated 19.04.2023, along with the summary of the order, dated 28.03.2026, before the Appellate Authority. It is made clear that the limitation for the said appeal would be calculated by taking the date 28.03.2026 as the date from which the limitation would commence. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

2026