Facts of the Case

Victory Earthmoving Equipment and Attachments was served with an order of assessment dated 30.04.2024 in Form GST DRC-07, passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Visakhapatnam, covering the consolidated period from July 2017 to March 2022. The petitioner had separately assailed the underlying Order-in-Original dated 24.04.2024 (levying tax under Section 74 instead of Section 73), the summary orders in Form GST DRC-07 dated 30.04.2024 and 07.05.2024, and the show cause notice dated 31.12.2023, on grounds including absence of a Document Identification Number, lack of signature, and denial of adequate hearing, besides the core objection that a single composite order could not cover five financial years at once.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a single assessment order spanning more than one financial year is permissible under Section 73 and Section 74 of the GST Act, 2017.
  2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to have the composite order set aside, following the Division Bench ruling in W.P.No.11028 of 2025 & batch, with liberty for the Department to proceed year-wise.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • A single assessment order passed for more than one financial year is violative of Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017, and the assessment/appeal orders deserve to be set aside on this ground.
  • Various additional grounds were also raised, including absence of DIN and signature and denial of opportunity of hearing.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC appeared for the respondents; the order does not record any separate defence distinguishing the binding Division Bench ruling on composite assessment orders.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court noted that a Division Bench of the High Court, in W.P.No.11028 of 2025 & batch, had held that a single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot be passed for more than one tax period once the annual return due date has passed for the earlier periods.
  • The writ petition was disposed of, setting aside the impugned order dated 30.04.2024, leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings for each assessment year separately.
  • The period from the impugned order till receipt of the present order was excluded for computing limitation; no costs were awarded.

Important Clarification

  • Even a long-pending dispute involving multiple ancillary grounds (DIN, signature, natural justice) can be disposed of purely on the composite-assessment ground once the period spans more than one financial year, without the Court needing to examine the other contentions.
  • The Department retains liberty to reopen the matter year-wise, with the intervening period excluded from limitation.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, CGST/APGST Act, 2017 and Section 74, CGST/APGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax, with the composite-order bar applicable to both.

Decision – In Favour of

Assessee, on the composite-order ground; disposed of with liberty to the Department to proceed year-wise.

Case Details

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; W.P.No.20274 of 2024; Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Hon'ble Sri Justice Subhendu Samanta; Order dated 05.11.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.