APHC010487532026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE 18th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 26668 OF 2026 Between: 1. M/s TAPASWINI CONSTRUCTIONS, Address. 15-12, Sathram Center, Penuganchiprolu, APKRI, Andhra Pradesh, 521190 Mail Id. tapaswiniconstructions@gmail.com Rep by Managing Partner. Srinivasa Chakravarthy Sunkara S/o Sunkara Pitchaiah Address. 54-18-25/4, LIC Colony, Road No.1, VJ Polytechnic, APKR1, Andhra Pradesh, 520008. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT), Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522503. 2. The Chief Commissioner of State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department, D. No. 12-468-4, Adjacent to NH-16, Service Road, Kunchanapally, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh-522501. 3. The Joint Commissioner ST, Vijayawada No. 3 Division, Vijayawada, Office of the Joint Commissioner (State Tax), Vijayawada-3Division, D.No.20-1-34, JRR Commercial Building, Lotus Landmark, Ayodhya Nagar,Vijayawada, Krishna, Andhra Pradesh-520003. NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.26668 of 2026 2 4. Assistant CommissionerST, Patamata Circle, No.III Division, Vijayawada,Plot.No.8, J RR Complex, Second floor, Ayodya Nagar, Beside Lotus Land Mark Entrance Gate, NTR District, Vijayawada- 520003. 5. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, Represented by its Commissioner (GST). 6. Union of India, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110 001. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: DURGA MAHINDRA PONNAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.26668 of 2026 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Writ Petition No:26668 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: (per Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. Petitioner, registered dealer under Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short “the Act”) with GSTIN:37AARFT4533C1Z1 is engaged in the service of construction of residential apartments and selling of flats, aggrieved by common Assessment Order dated 13.01.2026 issued by respondent No.4, filed the present writ petition on various grounds. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the various averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, made submissions inter alia that the order of respondent No.4 covering tax period for the different Assessment Years i.e., 2021 to 2024 is not sustainable, in the light of the decision rendered by this Court in S J Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner & ors. (W.P No.11028 of 2025) dated 17.09.2025., and seeks to allow the writ petition by setting aside the impugned orders. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader, while refuting the said contentions sought to sustain the impugned order. His submission is that the petitioner instead of availing the remedy of appeal had straightaway filed the NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.26668 of 2026 4 present writ petition and the same is not maintainable. However, he has not disputed the decision rendered by this Court in S J Constructions (referred to supra), but states that an appeal has been preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and notice in delay petition was ordered. 5. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused material on record. 6. Though several contentions were raised in the writ petition, this Court feels it not necessary to examine the same in detail. Suffice to state that impugned order is liable to be set aside on the ground that the same is a composite order covering the tax periods 2021 to 2024. 7. In W.P No.11028 of 2025 & batch, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 held as follows: “17. Section 74(3) is in parimateria with Section 73(3). However, sub- section (4) of Section 74 does not contain the term “such tax period”. This non mention would not, in our opinion, make any difference to the aforesaid interpretation. Apart from this, there are certain other provisions, which would also have to be considered. Any interpretation of an Act should not result in some of the other provisions becoming otiose or reduced in scope. As rightly pointed out by the Hon’ble High Court at Madras, the right of a registered person to obtain benefit under Section 128 of APGST Act as well as the right to invoke the remedy of appeal against the orders of assessment either under Section 73 or under Section 74 would get NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.26668 of 2026 5 impacted if a common order is permitted to be issued in relation to more than one assessment / financial year. 18. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that a single show cause notice or a single composite assessment order cannot be passed in relation to more than one tax period of either a month if the assessment is taken up before the due date for filing of the annual return or for more than one year if the due date for filing of annual return has been reached.” 8. In the light of the above cited decision and for reasons alike, the impugned order is set aside. Writ Petition is disposed of, as indicated above. 9. Needless to observe that respondent No.4 is at liberty to issue separate notices in respect of relevant tax periods and proceed with the assessments in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the petitioner. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA _____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Date:18.09.2026 Ksj