M/S.Sri Nomula Brothers vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

APHC010129452026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6845/2026 Between: 1. M/S SRI NOMULA BROTHERS, 106, 1ST A.P. COTTON ASSOCIATION, MAIN ROAD, GUNTUR - 522 007. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REP. BY ITS PARTNER MR.CHINNA VENKATA SUBBARAO NOMULA ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, (ST) BRODIPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR-LL DIVISION, GUNTUR.-522002 2. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, BRODIPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR-LL DIVISION, GUNTUR-522002 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, . REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI.-522237 ...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 issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring (1) the action of the 1st and 2nd Respondents in passing the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, and the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 20.12.2025, for the tax period 2018-19 under the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017, without considering the objections of the Petitioner, 2 15.07.2025 and without providing an opportunity to the Petitioner after filing of objections, is in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law (2) the action of the 1st Respondent in not issuing prior Notice in Form GST DRC-01A as per Rule 142(1 A) of the SGST/CGST Rules, 2017, as arbitrary, contrary to the Provisions of the CGST/SGST Acts 2017, bias, perverse, without jurisdiction, not valid in the eye of law (3) the action of the 1st and 2nd Respondents in passing the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, the Order, dated 20.12.2025 and the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 20.12.2025, without generating DIN in the Orders, though the Honble Court set aside the W.P.No.7842 of 2025, dated 02.04.2025 for not generating the DIN, against passing the Orders, again passing Orders without DIN, is not valid in the eye of law and also the same is in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of law and consequently set aside the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, the Order, dated 20.12.2025 and the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 20.12.2025 passed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents for the tax period 2018-19 under the CGST/SGST Act 2017, as null and void and pass 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 pleased to suspend the operation of the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, the Order, dated 20.12.2025 and the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC- 07, dated 20.12.2025 passed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents for the tax period 2018-19 under the CGST/SGST Act 2017, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX WRIT PETITION NO: 6852/2026 Between: 1. M/S.SRI NOMULA BROTHERS,, 106, 1ST A.P. COTTON ASSOCIATION, MAIN ROAD, GUNTUR - 522 007. STATE OF 3 ANDHRA PRADESH. REP. BY ITS PARTNER MR.CHINNA VENKATA SUBBARAO NOMULA ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, BRODIPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR-LL DIVISION, GUNTUR.522002 2. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, BRODIPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR-LL DIVISION, GUNTUR 522002 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI.522237 ...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 issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring (1) the action of the 1st and 2nd Respondents in passing the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, and the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 20.12.2025, for the tax period 2017-18 under the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017, without considering the objections of the Petitioner, dated 15.07.2025, without providing an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner after filing of objections is in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law (2) the action of the 2nd Respondent in passing the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 20.12.2025, without signature, is nonest in the eye of law (3) the action of the 1st Respondent in not issuing prior Notice in Form GST DRC-01A as per Rule 142 (1A) of the SGST/CGST Rules 2017, as arbitrary, contrary to the Provisions of the OGST/SGST Acts 2017, bias, perverse, without jurisdiction, not valid in the eye of law (4) the action of the 1st and 2nd Respondents in passing the Order not generating DIN in the notices and Orders, though the Hon’ble Court set aside the W.P.No.7842 of 2025, dated 02.04.2025 for not generating the DIN, against passing the Orders, again passing Orders without DIN, is not valid in the eye of law and also the same is in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of law and consequently set aside the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, the Order, dated 20.12.2025 and the Summary of the Order, dated 20.12.2025 passed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents for the tax period 2017-18 under the CGST/SGST Act 2017, as null and void and pass such 4 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 suspend the operation of the Proceedings, dated 19.12.2025, the Order, dated 20.12.2025 and the Summary of the Orders, dated 20.12.2025 passed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents for the tax period 2017-18 under the CGST/SGST Act 2017, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 5