WP/2827/2026 of Gongala Reddy Veena Vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 March 2026

1. GONGALA REDDY VEENA, W/O LATE ONGALA REDDY MADHUSUDHAN REDDY (PROPRIETOR OF M/S DINESH TRADERS), AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS, R/O. 3/196/A, ALANKANPALLI, KADAPA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516001

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KADAPA-II CIRCLE, KADAPA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516001.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522020.

3. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE TAX, KADAPA DIVISION, KADAPA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516001

...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, Order or direction particularly one in the nature 'WRIT OF MANDAMUS' i. Setting aside the Impugned Assessment Order in Form VAT-305 dated 29.03.2016 demand an amount of Rs. 52,40,086/- due to the non-payment of tax , interest and penalty for the period from the Financial Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 (Upto May 2015) Rule 25 (5) of the Value Added Tax, 2005. ii. 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 may be pleased to order stay of recovery of demand pursuant to the Impugned Assessment Order in Form VAT-305 dated 29.03.2016 issued by Respondent No. 1 Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. K.RAGHAVENDER REDDY 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 K. Raghavendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.

2. The issue raised in the present Writ Petition is the applicability of an order of assessment, passed against the assessee who had subsequently passed away, had also come for consideration in W.P.Nos.3145 & 3177 of 2022. A Division Bench of this Court by an Order, dated 08.10.2025 had taken the view that the proceedings could not have been initiated or concluded against a dead person without bringing such a dead person’s legal representative on record. In the present case, the husband of the petitioner had passed away on 02.05.2021, after the order of assessment, dated 29.03.2016 had been passed against him. Though, the order had been passed prior to the demise of the husband of the petitioner, it would only be appropriate that the petitioner is also given an opportunity to make out a case against the order of assessment, dated 29.03.2016.

3. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 29.03.2016 and remanding the matter back to the assessing officer to pass appropriate orders after notice to the petitioner herein. 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:- 18.03.2026 BSM

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 2827 of 2026

Date:-18.03.2026

BSM