1 APHC010135602025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NOs: 6935/2025 & 6919 of 2025 Between: M Vakula Devi ...PETITIONER AND The Commercial Tax Officer and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. WRIT PETITION NO: 6919/2025 Between: M Vakula Devi ...PETITIONER AND The Commercial Tax Officer and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX This Court made the following commonorder: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was subjected to audit and assessment by the 1st respondent, for the period 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Upon completion of the assessment, an order of assessment dated 25.01.2019 was passed and a consequential order of penalty dated 31.03.2020. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court, with the contention that the orders of assessment and penalty had not been served on the petitioner and the petitioner could obtain the certified copies of the impugned orders only on 21.02.2025, after having come to know of the passing of the orders and after applying for certified copies of such orders. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is an unregistered dealer and the 1st respondent is not the territorial assessing officer. Consequently, the 1st respondent could have undertaken the audit and assessment of the petitioner only upon proper authorization being given separately for audit and for assessment. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the 1st respondent had only been authorized to carry out assessment and no authorization had been given to conduct any audit of the accounts of the petitioner. However, the 1st respondent has carried out an audit of the 3 accounts of the petitioner and had passed an assessment order and consequently order of penalty, based on the said audit. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the Judgments of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Sri Balaji Flour Mills vs. The Commercial Tax Officer-II, Chittoor and Ors.,1 and M/s. Dekars Fires & Security Systems Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division &Ors.,2 contends that a single authorization for conduct of audit or a single authorization for conduct of assessment would not empower the said officer to take up the proceeding of audit and assessment respectively. 6. The Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh considering this issue had held that an officer, who is not the territorial Assessing Officer of a dealer would require separate authorizations for conduct of audit and assessment. In the absence of both authorizations, the conduct of audit and assessment by such an officer would be invalid and requires to be set aside. 7. In the circumstances, both the present Writ Petitions are allowed setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 25.01.2019, and the consequential order of penalty dated 31.03.2020, passed by the 1st respondent. The matter is remanded back to the territorial Assessing Officer to 1(2011) 40 VST 150 (AP) 2(2011) 53 APSTJ 45 (AP) 4 pass orders, in accordance with law, after an opportunity of hearing is given to the petitioner. 8. The period between the date of the impugned order and the date of receipt of this order by the territorial Assessing Officer shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation. 9. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO,J _______________________ DR.K. MANMADHA RAO,J RJS 5 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO & HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.6919 & 6935 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Dt: 26.03.2025 RJS 6