Sri Sai And Co vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
APHC010131742025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3529] WEDNE AY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 7678/2025 Between:
SRI SAI AND CO, 1-40-199, MAJJIGAKALVA,
AVILALA JUNCTION,OPP MR PALLI POLICE STATION, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETRIX MRS. D. ANITHA, W/O. DESIREDDYHANUMANTHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, O/O. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST), TIRUPATI -III CIRCLE, TIRUPATI ANDHRA PRADESH,
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, TIRUPATHI-III CIRCLE, TIRUPATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER ST, CHITTOOR DIVISION, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH.
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...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
2
pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in levying tax, penalty and interest and also the late fee for non filing of the annual return under section 74 but not under section 47 and interest on late payment of tax under section 50 by his order dated 03-02- 2025 in Ref. No. ZD370225005441V in DIN No. DIN3703022591355 though the Petitioner has paid the taxes and penalties which was not at all considered by the 1st Respondent as violative of principles of natural justice, arbitrary, illegal, unjust, improper, irrational, contrary to section 74 of the GST Act 2017 and contrary to section 47 of the GST Act 2017 and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 ad 300-A of the Constitution of India leading to double levy ii) to declare the Notifications No. 08/2025 dated 23-01-2025 and also the Circular No. 246/03/2025-GST dated 30-01-2025 as illegal, arbitrary, and unjust, irrational. unequal and contrary to Section 47 of the GST Act 2017 which deals with the annual return and also violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently to set aside both the assessment order dated 03-02-2025 as also the Notifications No. 08/2025 dated 23-01- 2025 and also the Circular No. 246/03/2025-GST dated 30-01-2025 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 grant stay of disputed amount of Rs. 28,79,832/- (COST, SGST, Late fee. interest and penalty) pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
M V J K KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. 3
The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Heard Sri M. V. J. K. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with an order of assessment, dated 03.02.2025, passed by the 1st respondent. This order of assessment covers the period from 2018-19 to 2021-22. 3. The petitioner, after having raised various grounds of challenge, has pressed the ground that, a single order of assessment, issued for more than one financial year, would be violative of the provisions of Sections 73 & 74 of the GST Act, 2017 and consequently, set aside the impugned order of assessment.
A Division Bench of this Court, in W.P.Nos.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 of assessment being a composite order of assessment. In that view of the matter, the present Writ
4
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 of assessment, dated 03.02.2025 and remand back to the respondents, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings, for each assessment year separately. Coercive steps taken against the petitioner, including attachment, for recovery of the dues under this order shall also stand set aside. Needless to say, the period from the date of issuance of the impugned order of assessment till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purposes 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: 25.02.2026
BSM
5
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 7678 of 2025
Date: 25.02.2026
BSM
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.