1 APHC010437862024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3535] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHY WRIT PETITION NO: 22810/2024 Between: M/s. Sri Vijayalakshmi Filling Station, ...PETITIONER AND Commercial Tax Officer Fac and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner, who is a dealer in High Speed Diesel Oil and other petroleum and lubricant oils, had been served with an order of assessment, dated 26.06.2023, for the periods October 2022 and November 2022. Aggrieved by the said order of assessment, the petitioner had approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.23617 of 2023 which came to be dismissed. The 2 petitioner is said to have filed a review petition bearing I.A.No.1 of 2024 which is still pending. 2. Thereafter, the petitioner again approached this Court, by way of this Writ Petition challenging the penalty order, dated 03.09.2024, passed on the basis of the assessment order, dated 26.06.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had also challenged the order of assessment, dated 26.06.2023, by way of an appeal before the Additional Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Appellate Authority, Vijayawada. The learned counsel has placed proceedings of the said Appellate Authority, dated 25.03.2025, wherein the order of assessment has been set aside and the matter has been remanded back to the Commercial Tax Officer, Gudivada, for verifying the claim of the petitioner with reference to the documentary evidence and books of accounts being produced by the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the order of assessment itself has been set aside, the impugned order of penalty, which is based on the order of assessment, would also have to go in as much as the demolition of the foundation would result in the collapse of the super structure. 5. In view of the fact that the order of assessment has now been set aside, it would only be appropriate to set aside the order of penalty and 3 remand the matter back to the assessing authority to take appropriate steps after an order of assessment has been passed. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO,J ________________________ B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHY,J RJS 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHY WRIT PETITION NO: 22810/2024 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Dt: 23.04.2025 RJS