M/S.Transstroy Jsc Ec Ues Jv vs. The Additional Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
APHC010081302021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3529] MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH 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: 4864/2021 Between:
M/S.TRANSSTROY JSC EC UES JV,, REGD. OFFICE AT PLOT NO.201-202A, 202-B, GUTTALA BEGUMPET, KAVURI HILLS, HYDERABAD 500 081. STATE OF TELANGANA. REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR.CHERUKURI SRIDHAR
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX (CENTRAL EXCISE, SERVICE TAX AND GST), G.S.T. BHAVAN, KANNAVARI THOTA, GUNTUR 522 004. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE JOINT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE, VISAKHAPATNAM ZONAL UNIT, D.NO.28-14-17, SURYABAGH, BESIDE MELODY THEATRE, VISAKHAPATNAM 530
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 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 topleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in passing the Order-in-Original No.02/2020-21-GST, dated 30.06.2020 for the tax period July, 2017 to March, 2019 under the CGST Act 2017 and APGST Act 2017, passing the composite impugned order of Tax, Interest and Penalty, in a lock down period declared by both the Union of India as well as the State of Andhra Pradesh, without considering the objections filed by the Petitioner, dated 14.03.2020 and without granting sufficient opportunity to the Petitioner, though the Petitioner sought time during the Covid-19 Pandemic, without granting time and posting the case for personal hearing on 15.06.2020 and passing the Order-in-Original and more particularly against the said Order-in- Original (though the statutory appeal liable to prefer before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal which is yet to be constituted under Section 112(1) of CGST Act 2017 read with Rule 110 of CGST Rules 2017), as arbitrary, contrary to the Provisions of the Act and in violation of principles of natural justice and rule of law and set aside the same as null and void and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 Order-in¬Original No.02/2020-21- GST, dated 30.06.2020 passed by the 1st respondent, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner:
SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL II
SURESH KUMAR ROUTHU (SR SC FOR CBIC)
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with an Order of Assessment, dated 30.06.2020, passed by the 1st respondent. This Order of Assessment covers the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019. 3. The petitioner, after having raised various grounds of challenge, has pressed the ground that, 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 impugned order, dated 30.06.2020, 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 impugned 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:16.03.2026 KPV THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.4864 of 2021 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
2026
KPV
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.