WP/17115/2026 of M/s. EN ENTERPRISES Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) on 29 June 2026

1. M/S SRI VENKATESWARA PLASTICS AND IRON, 102, PLOT NO. 102, AUTO NAGAR, MANGALAGIRI - 522503 ANDHRA PRADESH. REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. REDDY VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O. RAMBABU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, O/O THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST)

MANGALAGIRI CIRCLE, GUNTUR DIVISION-1 ANDHRA PRADESH. 522503

2. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER1 ST, PEDAKAKANI CIRCLE, GUNTUR-I DIVISION, ANDHRA PRADESH.522509

3. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522237

...RESPONDENT(S): 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 action of the Respondent in passing the impugned attachment notice 17-04-2026 in arising from the adjudicating order dated 23-04-2024 passed in a composite manner for the tax periods 2019-20, 2020-21,2021-22,2022-23 and 2023- 2024 by the 2nd respondent by uploading the adjudication order but not served either physically or through email or through registered post and not sending any alert messages or mails to the Petitioner on his mobile or on his mail address as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, unethical without jurisdictional in authority, contrary to the principle of natural justice and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to set aside the same (or) to read down section 169 which says that the uploading of the show cause notice and adjudicating order in web portal as incorrect and improper and should be served through manually or through registered post and consequently to set aside the impugned order dated 23-04-2024 the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 the demand notice dated 17-04-2026 and the order in original dated 23-04-2024 pending disposal of the writ petition and grant Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. M V J K KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following order:

The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in issuing attachment notice dated 17.04.2026, and also adjudicating order dated 23.04.2024, as illegal, etc., on various grounds, and to set aside the same.

2. Mr. M.V.J.K.Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, inter-alia, submits that the impugned proceedings have been issued in a composite manner for the tax periods 2019-20, 2020- 21, 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24, by the 2nd respondent. While referring to the factual aspects of the case, the learned counsel mainly contends that, the issuance of a show cause notice and an assessment order in a composite manner for the financial years 2019-23 to 2023-24, is also not sustainable, and in similar circumstances, number of writ petitions were disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, of which, Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D.Sekhar, was a member. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the relevant portion of the judgments passed by the Co-ordinate Bench.

3. Mr. S.A.V.Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader, while refuting the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, furnished a copy of the order dated 22.06.2026 in WP.No.6082 of 2026, wherein, in similar circumstances, the writ petition was disposed of by setting aside the impugned proceedings, however, a direction was issued to pay 20% of the disputed tax.

4. Having heard learned counsel on both sides and considering the submissions made by them, we are inclined to dispose of the writ petition on similar lines, with their consent.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of adjudication dated 23.04.2026, and the consequential attachment proceedings dated 17.04.2026. The matter is remanded back to the respondents, leaving it open to them to initiate fresh proceedings for each adjudicating order separately, by issuing separate notices.

6. However, this order is subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit 20% of the disputed tax within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of the receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that, any payment made or any amount recovered from the petitioner, after passing of the impugned order, shall be adjusted against the aforesaid 20%.

There shall be no order as to costs.

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

__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

______________________

JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

Dt.30.06.2026 DSB

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

WP.No.17159/2026 Dated 30.06.2026

U DSB