M/s. Kothinti Venkata Reddy, Vs The Superintendent of Central Tax

M/S. KOTHINTI VENKATA REDDY,, HPCL DEALER, 0, 21/175, SAI BABA NAGAR, ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 518301, REP. BY ITS PARTNER, S.ABHINAY REDDY, S/O S. PARTHASARATHI REDDY, AGED 41 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O PLOT NO. 90, VIJAYA ESTATE, THIRURNALA NAGAR, ADONR, KURNOOL DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH, 518301.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, ADONI CAST RANGE, GROUND FLOOR, NEAR CHILDREN' PARK, N.R. PETA, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH - 518001.

¶15

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

¶16

THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE), MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001.

¶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, more

¶19

2

¶20

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.36732 of 2025

¶21

particularly in the nature of mandamus declaring that the impugned order in original No. 19/2024-25/GST/SUPDT, dated 29-01-2025, for the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22, under the CGST/AP SGST Acts, 2017, i.e., single Assessment Order was passed for multiple years, and by invoking S. 74 even though the ingredients for invoking the same are not available in the present case only for the purpose of availing the larger period of limitation available thereunder, as contrary to law, barred by limitation, unsustainable, impermissible and illegal and even on merits not sustainable and amounts to double taxation, and consequently set aside the same and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

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 all further proceedings, including recovery of tax, interest and penalty, pursuant to the impugned Order-in-Original No. 19/202425/GST/SUPDT, dated 29-01- 2025, passed by the First Respondent for the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 under the CGST/AP SGST Acts, 2017, and pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.G NARENDRA CHETTY

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶28

¶29

3

¶30

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.36732 of 2025

¶31

The Court made the following Order:

¶32

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

¶33

Heard Sri G. Narendra Chetty, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.

¶34

The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with an order of assessment, dated 29.01.2025, by the 1^st respondent. This order of assessment covers the period from 2017-18 to 2021-22.

¶35

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.

¶36

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.

¶37

The petitioner has raised various grounds of challenge. However, the petitioner is pressing the primary ground of the order of assessment being

¶38

4

¶39

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.36732 of 2025

¶40

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.

¶41

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 29.01.2025 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.

¶42

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

¶43

________________________

¶44

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶45

_________________

¶46

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

¶47

Date:07.01.2026 KA / MJA