APHC010463612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 24820/2025 Between: 1. AYYAPPA AGENCIES, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR. C. KODANDA REDDY, SURVEY NO. 178/A, THOTTAMBEDU VILLAGE AND MANDAL CHITTOOR-517644, CHITTOORDISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. APPELLATE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, TIRUPATI. 2. 2. APPELLATE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CT, TIRUPATI. 3. 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER CT, LEGAL VIJAYAWADA,ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. 4. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PUTTUR CIRCLE. 5. 5. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...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 setting aside the appellate order dated 28.5.2025 passed by the 1ST Respondent for the period November, 2014 to March, 2015 in Appeal No.21/2021-22/CTR confirming the penalty order dated 23.11.2020 passed by the 4TH Respondent as being 2 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.24820 of 2025 arbitrary, in gross violation of principles of natural justice and disobedience of the judgment of this Honble Court in the Writ Petition No. 12529 of 2024 in the case of M/s. Punjab Carbonic Private Limited and 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 to grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order dated 28.5.2025 issued by the 1ST Respondent for the tax period November, 2014 to March, 2015, pending disposal of the Writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 3 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.24820 of 2025 The Court made the following order: Heard Sri P. Karthik Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order of assessment, dated 30.03.2016, and the order of penalty, dated 27.04.2016, is said to have preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent, which came to be disposed of, by way of an order of remand. While the matter was pending at the stage of remand, the 3rd respondent exercised power under Section 32 of the AP VAT Act and proposed a revision of the Appellate Order, dated 19.08.2016. This revision was contested by the petitioner. The 3rd respondent had thereafter, passed an order, dated 04.11.2020, rejecting the contentions of the petitioner. A statutory appeal was filed against this order, before the VAT Tribunal and the same is pending in T.A.No.31 of 2025. 3. The revisional order of the 4th respondent was given effect to by the order of assessment, dated 23.11.2020 being pressed against the petitioner. The 4th respondent also issued a penalty order, dated 23.11.2020, levying penalty on the order. Aggrieved by this order of penalty, the petitioner filed Appeal No.21 of 2021-22, before the 1st respondent. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner sought to raise additional grounds, on the question of limitation, passed by a Judgment of this Court, dated 21.04.2025, in W.P.No.12529 of 2024. 4 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.24820 of 2025 4. The petitioner is said to have received a copy of the order of assessment, dated 28.05.2025, on 14.06.2025. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has approached this Court, raising various grounds, assailing the Appellate Order. However, the primary ground raised by Sri P. Karthik Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issue of limitation, raised by the petitioner, on the basis of the orders of this Court, had not been answered by the 1st respondent and as such there is violation of the principles of natural justice. 5. A perusal of the Appellate Order shows that this issue has not been answered. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition, setting aside the Appellate Order, dated 28.05.2025, and remanding the matter back to the 1st respondent to take an approriate decision, after considering the objections of the petitioner relating to limitation. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 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: 24.09.2025 MJA 5 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.24820 of 2025 149 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 24820 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 24.09.2025 MJA