Mopidevi Aruna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522238

¶19

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶20

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_11991_2026

¶21

2

¶22

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 a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.01.2025 and served on 01 .04.2026 passed by the 1st Respondent for the tax periods 2017-18 to 2020-21, and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitutionof India, and consequently declare that the levy of GST on the entire rental receipts without granting the benefit of threshold exemption under Section 22 of the CGST/APGST Act, 2017, as well as the invocation of Section 74 in the absence of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, are unsustainable in law, and further direct the Respondent to re-compute the tax liability, if any, strictly in accordance with law after granting the benefit of threshold exemption and pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶24

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 stay the operation of the impugned order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.01 .2025 passed by the 1st Respondent for the tax periods 2017-18 to 2020-21, and consequently stay all further proceedings pursuant thereto, and pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.CHIRANJEEVI TALASILA

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶29

The Court made the following:

¶30

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_11991_2026

¶31

3

¶32

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶33

AND

¶34

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

¶35

WP No.11991 OF 2026

¶36

ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar)

¶37

The petitioner is a registered tax dealer on the rolls

¶38

of the 1^st respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the owner of a building situated in Visakhapatnam which was leased to an educational institution. It is further stated that, she came to know through this educational institution that an order of assessment was passed against her. After coming to know of the same, the petitioner said to have submitted representation dt.07.03.2026 asking the 1^st respondent to furnish a copy of order of assessment. In response thereto, the petitioner was served with assessment order dt.18.05.2025 said to have been served on 01.04.2026. Questioning the said assessment order the present writ petition is filed alleging that the 1^st respondent did not follow the principles of natural justice while passing the said order inasmuch as no notice was issued to her.

¶39

Apart from the same, the petitioner also raised various other grounds inter alia contending that the Assessment

¶40

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_11991_2026

¶41

4

¶42

Order is not sustainable under law inasmuch as the same was passed for multiple tax periods 2017-2018 to 2020-2021. The counsel for the petitioner would further submit that in view of the order passed by this Court in the case of “SJ Constructions Vs. The Assistant Commissioner and two others ” in Writ Petition No.11028 of 2025 and batch wherein it was held that assessment order cannot be passed for multiple tax periods, the order impugned herein is liable to be set aside.

¶43

While refuting the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader, however would not dispute the judgment referred to herein above, whereunder this Court set aside the Assessment Order on the ground that the same cannot be passed for multiple tax periods. On a perusal of the record, it is apparent that the order under challenge was passed for the periods 2017-2018 to 2020-2021.

¶44

In such circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, the Assessment Order under challenge is set aside by following the judgment rendered by coordinate bench of this Court in the case of “SJ Constructions Vs. The Assistant

¶45

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_11991_2026

¶46

5

¶47

Commissioner and two others” in Writ Petition No.11028 of 2025 .

¶48

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned order dt.18.05.2025 passed by the 1^st respondent. It is made clear that the proper officer is at liberty to issue separate notices and proceed with assessment in accordance with law.

¶49

It is needless to say that the period from the date of impugned order till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation.

¶50