APHC010412252026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 22169 OF 2026 Between: 1. Sri Venkateswara Electricals, D. No. 4-35, Kanga Nellore, Punganur, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh - 517243, Rep. by its Proprietor S. Seetaramaiah. ...Petitioner AND 1. The Assistant Commissioner STII, Palamaneru Circle, Chittoor Division, Next to Devi Theatre, Kattamanchi, Tirupati Road, Chittoor, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh - 517001. 2. The Additional Commissioner ST, Appellate Authority, Tirupati, Flat No. 101, Thunga Residency, Raniparanthaka Devi Marg, Korameenugunta, Renigunta Road, Tirupati, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh- 517501. 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secetary to the Government, Revenue (CT) Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary (Finance), Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001. ...Respondents 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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring that the Composite Assessment Order passed by the First Respondent vide Case ID AD371022006036R, dated 24- 01-2023, for the Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020- 21,2021-22 and 2022- 23 under S. 74 of the GST Acts, 2017, as upheld by the First Respondent vide the impugned CTD Order No. 3716032666532, dated 17-03-2026, which was passed for 6 Assessment Years in a Single Order, which does not contain either a physical or a digital signature and is an unsigned order, which does not contain DIN, which was passed u/S. 74 even though the ingredients for invoking the same are not present, and by which tax was imposed on exempt services, as invalid, non-est, not an order in the eye of law contrary to law, and illegal and consequently set aside both the Assessment Order of the First Respondent and the Appellate Order of the Second Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No: 22169 OF 2026 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.A.V. Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. With their consent, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. Petitioner, a registered firm being aggrieved with the assessment order dated 24.02.2023 passed by the 1st respondent and subsequent appellate order dated 17.03.2026 passed by the 2nd respondent, filed the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to various averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, inter alia contends that the impugned order of the 1st respondent for the tax period 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 covering multiple tax periods, which was entertained in the appeal passed by the 2nd respondent, is impermissible in Law under the provisions of CGST Act. He also placed reliance on the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.J. Constructions v. The Assistant Commissioner & Others (W.P No.11028 of 2025 & batch), dated 17.09.2025, wherein, it was 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 4 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 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.” 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not disputed the legal position, much less the factual aspects with regard to issuance of composite order impugned in the writ petition. Be that as it may. As the original order itself is non est in law, the order in appeal is also not sustainable. 5. In view of the factual and legal position, the impugned orders dated 24.02.2023 and 17.03.2026 are set aside. However, the 1st respondent is at liberty to issue separate orders for each assessment year and proceed with the assessments in respect of tax periods in question, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, in accordance with Law. As the original order itself is not sustainable in law, the order in appeal against the same is also not tenable. 5 6. Further, the period from the date of passing of the impugned order till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation. 7. In view of setting aside of impugned orders, all consequential proceedings shall stand revoked. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, as indicated above. 9. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J _______________ T.C.D.SEKHAR, J GVK 6 42 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No. 22169 OF 2026 Dt. 06.08.2026 GVK