APHC010320752025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3541] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 16331/2025 Between: 1. SHRI LAKSHMI SUSSELA BOLISETTY, ON BEHALF OF SHRI BOLISETTY LAKSHMI NARASIMHA RAO (DECEASED), DOOR NO. 46-5-556, SISTIA VARI STREET, WARD -11, GUNTUR EAST, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, KOTHAPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR - II DIVISION, D. NO 11-1-73/1,4TH FLOOR, VASUNDHARA BLDGS RAJAJI BHAVAN, JINNA TOWER CENTER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH-522001. 2. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, KOTHAPET CIRCLE, GUNTUR - II DIVISION, D. NO 11-1-73/1,4TH FLOOR, VASUNDHARA BLDGS, RAJAJI BHAVAN, JINNA TOWER CENTER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH-522001. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (COMMERCIAL TAX) A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI. 4. UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE) NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 toa. pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order quashing the proceedings of the 1st Respondent in the Assessment Order issued in Form GST DRC 07 vide Ref No. ZD370824026748W dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) (hereinafter referred to as demand order) for the period FY 2018-19, as the Assessment proceedings were issued against the dead person as arbitrary, unconstitutional, unreasonable, and is without jurisdiction. b. The Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order for quashing the notice issued in Form GST DRC 17 vide DIN No. DIN3709062531760 dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) for auction of the property of the Petitioner, by the 2nd Respondent, in respect of the demands confirmed vide the impugned orders passed on the deceased person, in the interest of Justice and pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. c. And to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 1st Respondent in Demand Order issued in Form GST DRC 07 vide Ref No. ZD370824026748W dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) for the period FY 2018- 19, in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 set aside the notice for auction of the property of the petitioner dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) issued by the 2nd Respondent for recovery of the demands in respect of the impugned orders passed, 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 2. 3 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The husband of the petitioner, who is the registered person under the GST Act, had passed away on 02.12.2020. Subsequently, the petitioner had received an Order of assessment, dated 30.08.2024, raising a demand of Rs.6,41,137/-.The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said Order, has approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was unaware of the proceedings, initiated by the respondent authorities and that the Order had been passed without any opportunity being given to the petitioner. The petitioner also contends that the said order would have to be set aside on the ground that the order has been passed against a dead person. 3. Section 93 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides for continuation of assessment, in relation to certain special situations, including that of proceedings against dead persons. Section 93 (1) would be relevant: “93. Special provisions regarding liability to pay tax, interest or penalty in certain cases.— (1) Save as otherwise provided in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, where a person, liable to pay tax, interest or penalty under this Act, dies, then–– (a) if a business carried on by the person is continued after his death by his legal representative or any other person, such legal representative or other person, shall be liable to pay tax, interest or penalty due from such person under this Act; and (b) if the business carried on by the person is discontinued, whether before or after his death, his legal representative shall be liable to pay, out of the estate of the deceased, to the extent to which the estate is capable of meeting the charge, the tax, interest or penalty due from such person under this Act, whether such tax, interest or penalty has been determined before his death but has remained unpaid or is determined after his death” 4 4. In this view of the matter, it would only be appropriate that the petitioner be given an opportunity to set out his contentions against the proposed demands as such demands would become a liability on the petitioner, subject to the stipulations contained under Section 93 (1). 5. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, submits that notices had been sent to the address given by the husband of the petitioner and as such, the contentions of the petitioner, that she was unaware of the proceedings, cannot be accepted. 6. Even assuming that such notices had been sent in the name of the late husband of the petitioner, the same cannot be treated to be notices served on the petitioner. In any event, in view of the ambiguity as to the service of the notice, it would only be appropriate that the impugned order of assessment, dated 30.08.2024, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority for an appropriate decision after due notice is given to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order, dated 30.08.2024, and remanding the matter back to the Assessing Authority for appropriate decision, after due notice and opportunity being given to the petitioner. Needless to say, the period of limitation from the date of the order till the date of receipt of the order by the 1st respondent, shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J. ____________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM, J Dated: 09.07.2025 BSM 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.16331 of 2025 09-07-2025 BSM