BharatTaxGST

Bodanpu Venkata Naga Jagan Mohan Reddy vs. The Assistant Commissioner

Original PDF →
WP/25952/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01048608202530 November 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,T.C.D.SEKHAR6 pages
For Petitioner: SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDIFor Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1 APHC010486082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 25952/2025 Between: 1. BODANPU VENKATA NAGA JAGAN MOHAN REDDY, WORKS CONTRACTOR, GSTIN - 37AHAPJ8961E1Z9 REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR. BVN JAGAN MOHAN REDDY NO.6/144, MAIN ROAD, MANDLAPADU-523367 PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, PIDUGURALLA CIRCLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 2. 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. 3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001 ...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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1STRespondent in issuing assessment order dated 3.5.2023 for the period 2019-20 under the Goods and Service 2 Tax Act, 2017 in Form DRC -07 without signing either physically or digitally and without affixing document identification number on the assessment order or the show cause notice and proceeding to pass take coercive action without considering the request of the Petitioner for rectification, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Section 169 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and in gross violation of principles of natural justice as the order was passed without putting proposals about penalty and interest, and consequently direct the 1ST Respondent to redo the assessment following the principles of natural justice 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 recovery of the disputed demand pursuant to the impugned assessment order dated 3.5.2023 passed by the 1ST Respondent for the tax period 2019-20 under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, pending disposal of the Writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 3

The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

The petitioner, who is a registered person, was assessed to tax, for the period 2019-2020, by way of an order of assessment, dated 03.05.2023. The petitioner, then moved an application for rectification, in January, 2024, contending that certain payments of tax made by him and certain turnovers, which should not have been taken into account, had been taken into account by the assessing authority and the same requires to be rectified. This application for rectification is said to have been filed under Section 161 of the GST Act. This application for rectification was rejected by the authority on the ground that it is beyond time.

2.

Thereafter, the petitioner had approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition challenging the order of assessment, dated 03.05.2023, on the ground that the said order of assessment did not contain a Document Identification Number nor was the Assessment Order signed.

3.

The contention of the petitioner is that absence of a Document Identification Number renders the entire order invalid and such an order would have to be set aside. The petitioner also contends that lack of a signature on the assessment order would render the said order invalid and such an order would have to be set aside.

4.

The order of assessment was passed on 03.05.2023 and Form DRC-07 was issued. The GST portal, does not permit generation of such a 4

summary of the order, unless it is uploaded. This would mean that the order of assessment and the summary of the order had been uploaded more or less around 03.05.2023. The petitioner did not choose to file any appeal against this order nor did he choose to approach this Court, by way of a Writ Petition, at that stage.

5.

Sri Srinivasarao Kudupudi, the learned counsel would contend that the petitioner was sole proprietary concern and had shutdown its business. He would submit that the petitioner came to know of the said order only in January, 2024 when he moved an application under Section 161 of the GST Act. The learned counsel would submit that in such circumstances, the delay, if any, in approaching this Court should be condoned.

6.

The impugned order was passed on 03.05.2023. Even according to the petitioner, he was aware of the order in January, 2024. The application for rectification passed in January, 2024 is said to have been kept pending. In the circumstances, this Court cannot condone the delay in approaching this Court.

7.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

____________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J RJS

5

THE HON’ABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION No: 25952 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)

01.12.

2025

RJS

6

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.