M/s. Aravinda Constructions Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax

M/S. ARAVINDA CONSTRUCTIONS, 7/62-1, VASAVI NAGAR, MR PALLI, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH -507501 REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. PRABHAKAR REDDY POLAM, S/O. P. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, TIRUPATI CGST DIVISION, TIRUPATI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 517501

¶15

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522237

¶16

UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 4TH FLOOR, A-WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI110001

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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 the impugned composite Order of adjudicating authority 1st Respondent herein passed in Form GST DRC - 07 dated 24-12-2025 in DIN No. 20251255YL00000A50D levying tax, penalty

¶19

2

¶20

and interest under section 74 of GST Act, 2017 for the tax periods 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 on the alleged ground of non payment of GST under both forward and reverse charge mechanisms treating him as a recipient of services relating to leasing of land or transfer of rights to use land for mining or quarrying purposes though his registration was cancelled on 0109-2017 and not doing any business activity since then, basing on the income mentioned in the income tax returns. as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and unfair, also contrary to the provisions of the GST Law 2017 and passed the composite order which is not permissible under law and contrary to the judgment of this Honble Court, without jurisdiction and authority of law, violation of principles of natural justice, violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to set aside the impugned order dated 06-10-2025 and pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶22

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 to grant STAY of collection of disputed tax. interest & penalty pursuant to impugned composite Order of adjudicating authority -1st Respondent herein passed in Form GST DRC -07 dated 24-12- 2025 in DIN No. 20251255YL00000A50D for the tax periods 2018-19, 2019- 20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24

1.V Y PRABHUVU

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC)

¶27

2.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶28

3

¶29

The Court made the following Order:

¶30

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.

¶32

The petitioner is a registered firm, which has been served with an order of assessment, dated 24.12.2025 in Order-in Original No.26/2025-GST – Adjn (AC), by the 1^st respondent. This Order in Original covers the period from 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022.

¶33

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 Section 73 and Section 74 of the GST Act, 2017, and consequently, set aside the impugned order of assessment.

¶34

A Division Bench of this Court, in W.P.No.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.

¶35

The petitioner has raised various grounds of challenge. However, the petitioner is pressing the primary ground of the Order in Original being a composite order of assessment. In that view of the matter, the present Writ

¶36

4

¶37

Petition is being disposed of, on this ground of challenge, leaving open the other grounds of challenge.

¶38

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned Order in Original, dated 24.12.2025 and remand back to the respondents, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings, for each assessment year separately. Needless to say, that 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 purpose of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶40

________________________

¶41

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶42

_________________

¶43

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

¶44

Date: 04.02.2026 KA