Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/16403/2026 of M/S D BHASKAR REDDY Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ST) FAC on 21 June 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 16403/2026 Between: 1. M/S D BHASKAR
APHC010313612026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 16403/2026
Between:
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.
1. M/S D BHASKAR REDDY, WBRKS CONTRACTOR - GSTIN- 37ALQPD9873P1ZY REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI D. BHASKAR REDDY D.NO.8/43/5, NEAR LIC OFFICE, BNAGANAPALLE -518124, KURNOOL DISTRICT ARIDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONERST FAC, NANDYAL -II CIRCLE, D.N0.25/3A AND 3B, MSR COMPLEX, OPP APSRTC BUS STAND, NANDYAL -518501 KUNROOL (NANDYAL) DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522503 AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001
...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 wht pr order or direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in passing the
Assessment order dated 10.5.2022 for the period 2018-19 to 2019-20 under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 as in gross violation of principles of natural justice, also passed as composite order for more than one assessment year and not issued the intimation in Form DRC-01A under Rule 142(1A) of the COST Rules and also not signed the summary of assessment order and not affixed with the Document Identification Number on the assessment order, and consequently set aside the same and direct the 1st Respondent to redo the assessment affording opportunity of being heard in accordance with law, and pass orders in accordance with law 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 stay the operation of the proceedings of the 1®' Respondent in Forijn DRC -07 dated 10.5.2022 for the period 2018-19 to 2019-20 under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI 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 Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is a registered Company, which has been served with an order of assessment, dated 10.05.2022, passed by the 1st respondent. This order of assessment covers the period from 2018-19 to 2019-20.
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 Sections 73 & 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.Nos.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 10.05.2022 and remand back to the respondents, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings, for each assessment year separately, subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax. Any payments made after the impugned order had been passed shall be adjusted against the aforesaid 20%. Coercive steps taken against the petitioner, including attachment, for recovery of the dues under this order shall also stand set aside. 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
_________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J
Date: 22.06.2026
BSM
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 16403 of 2026
Date: 22.06.2026
BSM