V Venkateswara Reddy vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
APHC010310382023
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: 15963/2023 Between:
V VENKATESWARA REDDY, REPRESENTED BY IT'S PROPRIETOR, SRI VENKATESWARA REDDY S/O. VENKAT REDDY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, D.NO. 16/51/A1, SUBBARAOPETA, NANDIKOTKUR -518401, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 4TH FLOOR, A-WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI - 110001. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-I) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STFAC, NANDYAL-I CIRCLE, KURNOOL DIVISION, NANDYAL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE COMMISSIONER, ATMAKUR NAGARA PANCHAYAT,
2
ATMAKUR, NANDYAL 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 pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring tI7, impugned proceedings of 27- 04-2023 served on 11-05-2023 vide Annexure-P1 in Ref. No. ZD370423037109H issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Nandyal-I Circle, Nandyal District, Kurnool Division levying GST @ 12percent without there being payment of the tax component by the 2 nd and 4th and 5th respondents during the material time and consequential levy of interest as also penalty equivalent to the tax without taking into consideration, the TDS amounts deducted by authorities at source under section 51 of the CST Act and also tax payment made on 30-08-2019 vide CPIN in Rs. 3,43,045/- towards CGST as illegal, arbitrary, improper and violating articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 direct the 3rd respondent not to take any coercive action for recovery of the interest amounts of Rs. 6,72,068/- each under CGST and SGST Act as well as penalty of Rs. 10,77,332/- each under CGST and SGST Acts 2017 pending disposal of the writ petition or else I would suffer serious prejudice. Counsel for the Petitioner:
M V J K KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
N RANGA REDDY (SC MC RSEEMA SPSR NLR)
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 27.04.2023, passed by the 3rd respondent.
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 Petition is being disposed of, on this ground of challenge, leaving open the other grounds of challenge.
4
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 27.04.2023 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: 15963 of 2023
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.