Rangarao Guntupalli Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax

RANGARAO GUNTUPALLI, (SINCE DIED) REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE GUNTUPALLI KRISHNA KUMARI, 35-1-9, SIKHAMANI CENTRE, GIRIPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH- 520 010

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, VIJAYAWADA CGST DIVISIONAL OFFICE, D. NO. 55-173, C-14, PC-1,3RD FLOOR, STALIN CORPORATION, ROAD NO.2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520007

¶16

SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, SAMARANGANAM CHOWK CGST RANGE, D. NO. 55-173, 3D FLOOR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520007

¶17

SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, SURYA RAO PET CGST RANGE, D. NO. 55-17-3, 3RD FLOOR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520007

¶18

THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, GUNTUR CGST COMMISSIONERATE, GST BHAVAN, KANNAVARI

¶19

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_9310_2025

¶20

2

¶21

THOTA, GUNTUR - 522004

¶22

UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI110 001.

¶23

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶24

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

¶25

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶26

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 recovery of amounts confirmed vide the Order-ln-Original No.27/2023-24GST dated 14.02.2024 along with summary of Order in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD370324009346J dated 12.03.2024 passed by Respondent No.1 and pass

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶28

1.LAKSHMI KUMARAN SRIDHARAN

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶30

1.Y N VIVEKANANDA

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_9310_2025

¶33

3

¶34

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶35

AND

¶36

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

¶37

WP No.9310 OF 2025

¶38

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

¶39

The petitioner Sri Ranga Rao Guntupalli (since died) represented by his wife Smt.Guntupalli Krishna Kumari filed the present writ petition, questioning the assessment order dt.14.02.2024 along with summary order in Form GST DRC-07, dt.12.03.2024 as illegal, as it was passed against dead person.

¶40

It is the case of the petitioner that, her husband was engaged in execution of works contract and was registered under the GST Act as a Proprietorship Firm with GSTIN 37AEVPG0183P1ZS. It is further case of the petitioner that the sole proprietor died on 21.08.2020. Subsequent to his demise, the 1^st respondent issued show cause notice dt.16.12.2020 as to why the registration shall not be cancelled due to non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six (06) months. She filed reply dt.25.12.2020 stating that her husband passed away on 21.08.2020. Thereafter the registration of the dealer was cancelled by order dt.29.12.2020. Aggrieved by the same, the

¶41

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_9310_2025

¶42

4

¶43

deponent herein preferred appeal before the appellate authority. After considering the case of the deponent, the appellate authority through order dt.03.06.2022 restored the registration of the dealer with a finding that the GST Registrant being Proprietorship Firm would not have any legal existence after the death of the proprietor, however considering the request of the deponent to clear the tax dues on behalf of the dealer, the registration was restored.

¶44

It is further case of the deponent that she filed returns on 08.05.2022 for the period April, 2020 to August 2020, that after the death of her husband, no business was conducted nor there was any taxable turn over. While things stood thus, show cause notice dt.12.01.2024 was issued by the 1^st respondent, which was uploaded in the portal proposing to levy tax, interest and penalty in relation to assessment year 2018-19. The said notice was issued to the husband of the deponent and subsequently order of assessment was passed on 14.02.2024 and the same was uploaded in the portal. Questioning the same the present writ petition is filed on the ground that the show cause and order of assessment was passed against death person.

¶45

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_9310_2025

¶46

5

¶47

On the other hand, the Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, Sri Y.N.Vivevakananda would contend that the deponent having appeared before the appellate authority questioning the cancellation of registration, cannot contend that she does not have knowledge about the passing of order under challenge, especially when the same was uploaded in portal. He would further submit that, after restoration of registration of the dealer, the deponent herself filed returns by undertaking to pay the tax liability. Therefore, the present writ petition cannot be maintained on the ground that the same was passed against dead person.

¶48

A perusal of the order under challenge would show

¶49

that the same was passed in relation to the period 2018-19. Admittedly, the show case and the assessment order was issued against dead person. Further, as on the date of restoring the registration of the dealer i.e., 03.06.2022, admittedly, the 1^st respondent has not initiated any proceedings in relation to Assessment Year 2018-19. Further, admittedly show cause notice was issued on 19.12.2023 i.e., subsequent to restoration of the registration. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the

¶50

deponent had agreed to clear the taxes which were due, inasmuch as there was no demand as on the date.

¶51

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_9310_2025

¶52

6

¶53

Apart from the same, it is pertinent to note that the 1^st respondent despite having knowledge about the demise of the petitioner, in all fairness ought to have issued show cause notice to the deponent herein. Further, the order of assessment was also passed against dead person, which is not sustainable under law. The counsel for the petitioner would further submit that coordinate bench of this Court while dealing with similar issue allowed the writ petition No.6029 of 2025, dt.24.12.2025 as the Assessment Order therein, was passed against dead person is not valid.

¶54

Having considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and following the judgment rendered by the coordinate bench of this Court in WP.No.6029 of 2025, the Assessment Order dt.14.02.2024 and Summary Order in Form GST-DRC07, dt.12.03.2024 in relation to period 2018-19 are set aside and accordingly the writ petition is allowed. Needless to mention that, the 1^st respondent is at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings after issuing notice to the deponent of the writ petition and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

¶55

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_9310_2025

¶56

7

¶57