WP/16530/2026 of M/s. J D Constructions Vs The Deputy Commissioner (ST) on 23 June 2026

1. M/S. J D CONSTRUCTIONS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI SIVA REDDY AVULA, 2-186, GOGUIAPADU VILLAGE, ROMPICHERLA MANDAL, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH, 522617.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ST, GUNTUR - II DIVISION, D. NO 11-1-73/1,4TH FLOOR, VASUNDHARA BLDGS, RAJAJI BHAVAN, JINNA TOWER CENTER, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 001.

2. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, NARASARAOPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR - II DIVISION, S.NO 70/7, CHAKIRALAMITTA, BURAMPET BYPASS ROAD, BURMPET,

NARASARAOPET, PALANADU, ANDHRA PRADESH-522 601.

3. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER ST, APPELLATE AUTHORITY, VIJAYAWADA, D NO. 40-5-19/9B, BACK OF NVKR TOWERS MOGALRAJAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520010

4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (COMMERCIAL TAX), A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI - 522 238.

5. UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE) NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110

...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 a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order Quashing the proceedings of the 1st Respondent passed the Impugned Assessment Order issued vide DIN. 3725092544949 dated 25.09.2025 (Annexure P-1) (hereinafter referred to as demand order) wherein a single composite order and also single show cause notice was passed for the periods from FY 2018-19 to FY 2023-24, which is unreasonable, impermissible, violation of principles of natural justice and violation of the provisions of the GST Act, 2017 and violation of the Article 14, 19(1 )(g) and Article 265 of the Constitution of India. Quashing the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent in Endorsement for Rejection of Appeal dated 08.05.2026 (Annexure P-2) rejecting the appeal filed by the Petitioner as time-barred and prayed for condoning the delay in filing the appeal on account of Petitioner has filed application for ROM. 5 Consequently, to quash or set aside all the recovery proceedings by way of attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner, fof recovery of the demands confirmed vide the above impugned assessment order dated 25.09.2025. 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 stay the operation of the proceedings of the 1®* Respondent passed the Impugned Assessment Order issued vide DIN. 3725092544949 dated 25.09.2025 (Annexure P-1), in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 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 recovery proceedings by way of attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner, for recovery of the demands confirmed vide the above impugned assessment order dated 25.09.2025. in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

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

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Bezawada, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with an order of assessment, dated 25.09.2025 passed by the 1st respondent. This order of assessment covers the period from 2018-19 to 2023-24.

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. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 25.09.2025 and remand back to the respondents, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings, for each assessment year separately. All issues are left open to be adjudicated before the Assessing Authority.

7. 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: 16530/2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Date:24.06.2026 MJA