WP/16611/2026 of Piyush Pharmachem India Pvt. Ltd Vs Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals) on 23 June 2026

1. PIYUSH PHARMACHEM INDIA PVT. LTD, 7-33, NEAR Z P HIGH SCHOOL PEDAMUSIDAWADA PARAWADA VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH -531019 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, SHRI JHAWAR SURENDRA KUMAR, S/O. S L JHAWAR,

AGED ABOUT

YEARS, RIO. H.NO. 120, SHANTINIKETAN COLONY, EAST MAREDPALLY, NEHRU NAGAR,

...PETITIONER AND

1. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX APPEALS, GUNTUR COMMISSIONER APPEALS, D.NO.3-30-15, RING ROAD, GUNTUR- 522 006.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, PLOT NO. 36A, PANDURANGAPURAM, RK BEACH ROAD, WALTAIR WARD, VISAKHAPATNAM-530003

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DGGI VISAKHAPATNAM ZONAL UNIT, D.NO. 28-14-17, SURYABAGH, BESIDE MELODY THEATRE, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530020

4. UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY ITS

SECRETARY, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001

...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, more particularly a Writ of Mandamus to declare that The impugned Order-in- Appeal No. VTZ-GST-JC-APP-018- 2025-26 dated 02.12.2025 bearing DIN 20251255MK000000C807, passed by Respondent No.1 under the provisions of the CGST/APGST Act, 2017, as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law, apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India, and to 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 stay the operation and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. VTZ-GST-JC- APP-018-2025-26 dated 02.12.2025 bearing DIN: 20251255MK000000C807 issued by Respondent No.1 and/or pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. SANTHI CHANDRA

The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Heard Sri P. Venkata Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Santhi Chandra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with an order of assessment, dated 23.09.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent. This order of assessment covers the period from 2017-18 to 2018-19. An appeal, filed against the said order, came to be dismissed, by an order, dated 02.12.2025.

3. 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.

4. 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.

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

6. The learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents, would contend that the petitioner having availed the remedy of appeal and having failed in the said appeal, cannot be permitted to challenge the order of assessment.

7. A Division Bench of this Court, in its order, dated 18.12.2023, in W.P.No.31675 of 2023, had held, in similar circumstances that a challenge to the original order would be maintainable even if the appeal has been disposed of.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 23.09.2024 and remand back to the respondents, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings, for each assessment year separately. This order is subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 20% of the disputed tax, within a period of six (06) weeks. Any payment made or any amount recovered from the petitioner, after the passing of the impugned order, shall be adjusted against the aforesaid 20%.

9. Needless to say, 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 purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.

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

________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

________________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J

Date:24.06.2026

MJA

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Recorded Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

WRIT PETITION NO: 16611/2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Date:24.06.2026 MJA