Following its ruling in S J Constructions, the Court held that the original order was invalid as a composite order, and the appellate order upholding it could not survive, subject to a 50% deposit.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has set aside a single assessment order covering multiple financial years, along with the appellate order confirming it, holding that a composite order across tax periods is not sustainable in law [Sri Lakshmi Ganga Bhavani Oil Mill v. Assistant Commissioner ST, Kadapa & Ors.].
The bench of Justices Ninala Jayasurya and T.C.D. Sekhar relied on the coordinate bench decision in S J Constructions v. Assistant Commissioner (W.P. No. 11028 of 2025), which held that “a single show cause notice or a single composite assessment order cannot be passed in relation to more than one tax period”, since such an order would affect the taxpayer’s right of appeal and the right to obtain benefits under Section 128 of the APGST Act.
The government pleader objected that the groundnut trader had skipped three hearings before the Appellate Authority, allowed the time for appeal to the Tribunal to lapse, and then approached the writ court. He also pointed out that the department’s challenge to S J Constructions was pending before the Supreme Court, though he did not dispute the ruling itself.
The Court held that since the appellate order was against an invalid original order, both had to go. Taking note of the petitioner’s conduct, it made the relief conditional on a deposit of 50% of the disputed tax within eight weeks, with credit for amounts already paid, and gave the department liberty to issue separate notices for each tax period.
2026-juristway.com-3113-HC(Andhra Pradesh)-GST
