M/S Gottipati Siva Naga Deepthi vs. The Assistant Commissioner(St)

Held

The Court held that the impugned summary order dated April 6, 2024, is invalid and set aside. The reasoning was based on the settled legal position that proceedings initiated against a deceased person have no legal efficacy. The Court referred to a previous decision in W.P No.6029 of 2025, which stated that assessments and proceedings can only be initiated against living persons, and proceedings against a deceased person are invalid. However, it was also noted that dues of a deceased person can be recovered from the business set up by them or from their estate. The Court directed that a fresh assessment be carried out by involving the petitioner, Smt. Gottipati Siva Naga Deepthi, after issuing appropriate notice and providing her with due opportunity of hearing. Any recovery initiated after the fresh assessment order should be against the estate of the deceased person and to the extent of the estate available to the petitioner. The period from the date of the impugned order till the receipt of this order was excluded for limitation purposes. The writ petition was allowed.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Gottipati Siva Naga Deepthi, is the legal heir of the deceased proprietor, Mr. Gottipati Siva Prasad, who passed away on September 29, 2023. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax issued a show cause notice and summary notice dated January 30, 2024, and an order dated April 6, 2024, under the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the tax period 2018-19, all in the name of the deceased proprietor. A further notice, Form GST DRC-16, dated September 15, 2026, was issued under Section 79 of the CGST/APGST Act, 2017. The petitioner, a homemaker, was unaware of these proceedings. The petitioner sought to quash these notices and orders, arguing they were passed against a deceased person and were therefore invalid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Goods and Services Tax (GST) proceedings initiated and orders passed against a deceased person are legally valid under the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? 2. Whether the petitioner, as the legal heir of the deceased proprietor, should be involved in the GST assessment proceedings? The petitioner argued that the impugned notices and orders, issued in the name of the deceased proprietor, are arbitrary, non-speaking, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India. They relied on a co-ordinate bench decision in W.P No.6029 of 2025 and a decision of the same bench in W.P No.21466 of 2026, asserting that the petitioner has not inherited any interest from the proprietary concern. The respondents argued that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner failed to avail the alternative remedy of appeal, and therefore, the writ petition should be dismissed.