Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/19313/2026 of M/s. Panidapu Chinna Venkata Ramaiah, Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ST) on 21 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE 22 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No: Between: 1. M/S. PANIDAPU CHINNA VENKATA RAMAIAH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, PANIDAPU CHINNA VENKATA RAMAIAH, 3 RAJAMPALLI VILLAGE, DARSI
APHC010358772026
IN THE
TUESDAY, T
THE HON’BLE
THE HON’B
WRIT
Between:
1. M/S. PANIDAPU CHI
ITS PROPRIETOR, P
RAJAMPALLI VILLAG
ANDHRA PRADESH -
1. THE
ASSISTANT
NELLORE DIVISION,
523001.
2. THE STATE OF A
PRINCIPAL SECRETA
TAX) A.P. SECRETA
Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr.CHIRANJEEVI TALA
Counsel for the Responde
GP FOR COMMERCIAL
N
WP
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
HE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
E SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
PETITION No: 19313 of 2026
NNA VENKATA RAMAIAH, REPRESE
PANIDAPU CHINNA VENKATA RAMAIA
GE, DARSI MANDAL, PRAKASAM D
- 523247
...PE
AND
COMMISSIONER(ST),
CIRCLE-II,
PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA P
NDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED
ARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (COM
RIAT, VELEGAPUDI. 522 238
...RESPON
r:
ASILA
ent(S):
L TAX
P_19313_2026
H
ENTED BY
AH, 3-239,
DISTRICT,
TITIONER
ONGOLE,
PRADESH-
D BY ITS
MMERCIAL
NDENT(S):
The Court made the following order: (Per NJS, J)
Petitioner, registered as a Tax Payer under APGST Act, 2017, aggrieved by Assessment Order in Form GST ASMT-15, dated 10.01.2025 of the 1st respondent, passed under Section 63 of the said Act and the Summary Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 21.01.2025, as illegal, arbitrary etc., and violative of principles of natural justice, filed the present writ petition.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.S.A.V.Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing on behalf of the respondents, who made submissions with reference to instructions dated 22.09.2026 furnished by the 1st respondent.
3.
With the consent of both sides, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the registration of the petitioner was cancelled from 31.05.2022 on the premise that the business activities were stopped. Thereafter, it appears that the 1st respondent undertook assessment proceedings for the financial year 2021-22
and passed the impugned orders without affording any opportunity to the petitioner. It is his contention that the petitioner is not aware of the proceedings initiated by the 1st respondent, in as much as, the petitioner has no access to the G.S.T.Portal, on cancellation of the registration. He submits that the petitioner came to know about impugned proceedings very recently when the Department is taking coercive action for recovering the tax assessed
in order, in original. He submits that though the petitioner has remedy of appeal, since the Assessment Orders have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, the writ petition deserves to be allowed by setting aside the impugned orders.
5.
On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the 1st respondent, after following the due procedure, passed the impugned orders and the contentions contra are not tenable. He submits that as the registration of the petitioner was cancelled, Show Cause Notice in Form GST
ASMT-14 dated 22.05.2024 was sent through registered post with acknowledgment due on 24.05.2024, but as stated in the written instructions, the postal acknowledgment relating to the said notice could not be traced in the office records. Likewise, the Assessment Order dated 10.01.2025 was sent through registered post with acknowledgment due on 24.01.2025, but the postal acknowledgment, in respect of the same also could not be traced in the office records. He further submits that as Notice dated 22.05.2024 and the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
dated 10.01.2025 were sent through registered post with acknowledgment, the same are deemed to have been served. Thus, he submits that the petitioner is well aware of the impugned proceedings and without disclosing the said aspects, the present writ petition is filed and the same is therefore liable to be dismissed. Referring to the material papers (postal receipts dated 24.05.2024 and 24.02.2025) purportedly in relation to the proceedings impugned in the present writ petition, he submits that the petitioner having failed to work out the remedies against the impugned proceedings / orders, at the appropriate time, filed the present writ petition without explaining the delay and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the said ground as also in view of the alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner. Accordingly, he urges for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record.
7. At the outset, it may be pertinent to note that undisputedly petitioner’s registration was cancelled w.e.f., 31.05.2022. If that be the undisputed position, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner will not have access to the G.S.T.Portal. Therefore, any notice which may be placed in the G.S.T.Portal will not be in the knowledge of the petitioner. However, it appears that the impugned assessment order was sent to the E-Mail of the petitioner. Whether the petitioner, who surrendered registration, verified mails after cancellation of the registration, though may be an issue to be examined by going into the matter in detail, this Court instead of undertaking the said exercise and more particularly in the light of the decision in W.P.No.14969 of 2024 dated 29.07.2024 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench, inclined to dispose of the writ petition on similar lines. In the said case, the fact situation is similar to the case on hand. While taking a view that the cancellation of the registration could have resulted in the petitioner not looking into the mails sent to the E-Mail I.D., which was registered with the Department, the Division Bench disposed of the writ petition, providing that impugned proceedings therein shall be treated as notice of the pending assessment.
8. In the light of the said decision, the impugned assessment order is set aside. Matter is remanded to the 1st respondent for fresh adjudication. However, the order impugned shall be treated as Show Cause Notice and the petitioner is granted three (3) weeks time to file his response to said notice. Thereafter, a personal hearing shall be afforded to the petitioner by fixing a specific date. In the event of any further time being sought by the petitioner, the same shall be sought by giving the E-Mail I.D., and the address at which the petitioner can be contacted and the notice can be served on the petitioner.
9. Further, as the petitioner has approached this Court at a belated time, it would be appropriate that the petitioner shall pay 10% of the disputed tax as a pre-condition for being permitted to file his objections.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Date: 22.09.2026 BLV
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
W.P.No.19313 of 2026 Dt: 22.09.2026
BLV