Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sree Chaitanya Corporation Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December, 2025
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010580742025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3529]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025
WRIT PETITION NO: 29968/2025
Between:
1. SREE CHAITANYA CORPORATION PVT LTD, REP BY IT'S
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
SRI.RACHURI KANAKA RAO, D.NO. 1-91-6/2, GF-2, MEGHANA
PARADISE, SECTOR-5, M.V.P.COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIET
BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI.
2. THE COMMERICAL TAX OFFICER, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE,
VISAKHAPATNAM.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE,
VISAKHAPATNAM -1 DIVISION,
4. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST FAC, CHINA WALTAIR
CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM.
5. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER II, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE,
VISAKHAPATNAM-I DIVISION.
6. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER III, CHINA WALTAIR
2
RRR,J & TCDS,J
W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025
CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM-I DIVISION.
...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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2ND Respondent in issuing the Certified True Copies dt.03-10-2025 of the Assessment Orders dt.26-03-2019 (2014- 15 CST) vide bearing A.O.No. 152764 (2014-15) dt.05- 03-2020 and A.0.No.200882 for the year (2015-16 CST) without giving any notice or giving an opportunity of hearing is illegal, arbitrary, capricious and against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India. Consequently, set aside the as contrary to the VAT and CST Act 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 to suspend the Certified True Copies dt.03-10-2025 of the Assessment Orders dt.26-03-2019 and 06-03-2020 bearing A.O.No.152764 (2014- 15) and A.O.No.200882 for the year (2015-16 CST) wherein directed to pay an amount of Rs.6,69,70,947/- and the notice of attachment of personal accounts in the bank dt.29-07-2024 issued by the Respondents No.4 and 5 pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass WRIT PETITION NO: 30402/2025 Between:
1. CHAITANYA IMPORTS AND EXPORTS, REP BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY AND MANAGING PARTNER, SRI RACHURI KANAKA RAO, D.NO. 1-91-6/2, GF-2, MEGHANA PARADISE, SECTOR - 5, MVP COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIET 3 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI.
2. THE COMMERICAL TAX OFFICER, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM -1 DIVISION.
4. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER III, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM.
5. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER II, CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM-I DIVISION.
6. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER II, BHEEMILI CIRCLE.
...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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in Issuing the Certified Tru Copies dt.03-10-2025 of the Assessment Orders in A.O.No.105118 of 2013-14 (CST)/dt.22-03-2918, A.O.No.151769 of 2014-15 (CST)/dt.22- 03-2019, A.O.No.200895 of 2015-16 (CST)/dt.0(5-O3-2O2O, form VAT 305 (Assessment Value Added Tax), dt.31-03-2016 and form 203 (penalty) dt.20-11-2017 without giving any notice or opportunity of hearing is illegal, arbitrary, capricious and against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India.
Consequently, set aside the same as contrary to provisions of VAT and CST Act 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 to suspend the impguned Certified True Copies dt.03-10-2025 of the Assessment Orders issued by the 2nd Respondent in A.O.No.105118 of 2013-14 (CST)/dt.22-03-2018, A.O.No.151769 of 2014-15 (CST)/dt.22-03- 2019, A.O.No.200895 of 2015-16 (CST)/dt.06 03-2020, form VAT 305 (Assessment Value Added Tax), dt.31-03-2016 and form 203 (penalty) dt.20- 11-2017 wherein directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,13,75,626/-pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass 4 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. N A RAMACHANDRA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 5 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 The Court made the following Common Order:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) As both these cases relate essentially to the same person, even otherwise, they relate to sister concerns and raise similar questions of law, they are being disposed of, by way of this common order.
2. Heard Sri K. S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri N. A. Ramachandra Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mannam Venkata Krishna Rao, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents.
3. In both cases, the petitioners had been registered, under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act and had conducted business. The Assessing Authorities, appear to have passed orders for the tax period 2014-2015, on 26.03.2019, and for the tax period 2015-2016, on 05.03.2020. These orders are said to have been served on the petitioners. However, the petitioners deny receipt of these orders.
4. In W.P.No.30402 of 2025, assessment order, dated 22.03.2018, is said to have been passed, for the year 2013-2014 and an assessment order, dated 22.03.2019, is said to have been passed for the year 2015-2016. Apart from this, the penalty orders are also said to have been passed, on 31.03.2016 & 20.11.2017.
5. The petitioners have approached this Court, contending that, neither these orders nor the show-cause notices preceding these orders have been 6 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 served on the petitioners and as such, they were unable to put forth their case, before the Assessing Authority and that, they were unable to file Appeals against the impugned assessment orders. It is the case of the petitioners that, they came to know of these orders only, after coercive steps for recovery of tax and other dues, arising out of these orders, had been commenced, against the petitioners. At that stage, the petitioners are said to have approached the Assessing Authority for copies of the assessment orders and the same were served on the petitioners only, on 03.10.2025.
6. In the aforesaid averments, the petitioners further contend that, the impugned orders need to be set aside in as much as the orders were not preceded by any show-cause notices, served on the petitioners, and also on the ground that, non-service of such orders for a period of 6 to 7 years, would render the said orders void.
7. The respondent authorities, on the other hand, contend that, the notices had been served on the petitioners, prior to completion of the assessment orders and such orders came to be passed only, after an adequate opportunity had been given to the petitioners. It is further contended that, even the orders of assessment were served on the petitioners, by post, and proof of service, in this regard, has been placed before this Court.
8. The petitioners, on the other hand, contend that, the notices sent by post were returned with an endorsement 'Addressee Left'. It is stated that, the petitioners had closed down their service, after due intimation to the 7 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 respondents and the said intimation letters sent to the respondent authorities, have also been placed before this Court.
9. The learned Government Pleader, would contend that, these documents appear to be fabricated as the said documents are not available, in the records of the respondents. He would also submit that, the acknowledgment, of these documents, by the respondent authorities, were signed by the dispatch clerk and such an acknowledgement is invalid. He further submits that, the dispatch clerk would only sign communications, which are sent outward to the dealers, and a separate inward register is maintained, in the office and any acknowledgment would have to be only by the Assessing Authority or the person incharge of the inward register.
10. The petitioners have produced letters and communications, showing that, they sought cancellation of their registration as they were closing their business. These applications are said to have been sent, on 20.03.2017. The orders of assessment, which are under challenge, are after that date. In the normal circumstances, it would have to be ensured that any notice, thereafter, is served on the dealer either by registered post or by service in-person. Once the notices sent by registered post are returned, it would be the duty of the Assessing Authority to ensure that the said returns are served in-person.
11. However, the question of receipt of the intimation seeking cancellation of registration made by the petitioners is disputed by the respondent 8 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 authorities and it would not be appropriate for this Court to go into these questions of fact.
12. However, it would be appropriate that the benefit of doubt is given to the petitioners and an opportunity is earlier given to the petitioners to set out their case against the proposed assessment. In such circumstances, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, setting aside the impugned orders and the matters are remanded back to the Assessing Authority for appropriate assessment proceedings to be completed. For this purpose, the postal address of the petitioners shall be the address given in the Writ Petitions herein.
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:31.12.2025 KPV 9 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 179 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION Nos.29968 & 30402 of 2025 (per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 31.12.2025 KPV