ORDER : T.C.D. Sekhar, J. 1. The present writ petition is filed questioning the order in appeal dt.23.01.2025 passed by the 2 nd respondent confirming the Composite Assessment Order dt.25.02.2023 passed by the 1 st respondent in relation to the period from April, 2018 to July, 2022. 2. The petitioner is a registered dealer under GST Act on the rolls of the 3 rd respondent. It engaged in the business of trading in ferrous wastes, scrap and re-milting scrap ingots of iron and steel. It is the case of the petitioner that the 1 st respondent conducted inspection on 13.09.2022 and issued notice asking the petitioner to produce books of accounts for the above said period. 3. Thereafter, notice of intimation in Form DRC-01A, dt.17.12.2022 was issued followed by notice in DRC-01, dt.17.01.2023 for the period from April, 2018 to July, 2022. It is further case of the petitioner that, its registration was cancelled by order dt.05.08.2023 with effect from 30.06.2023. Thereafter, in pursuance of notices issued to the petitioner, the 1 st respondent passed Composite Assessment Order dt.25.02.2023 for the above period. Questioning the same, the petitioner preferred separate appeals before the 2 nd respondent and after hearing the petitioner, the appeals were dismissed by order dated 23.01.2025. Aggrieved by these orders, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes. 5. The petitioner has raised several grounds while assailing the orders under challenge. One of the grounds raised is that the original assessment order dt.25.02.2023 is not sustainable inasmuch as the same was passed in relation to periods from April, 2018 to July, 2022. The counsel for the petitioner would further submit that in similar circumstances this Court in the case of “ SJ Constructions Vs. Asst. Commissioner & others ” in W.P.No.11028 of 2025 held that single show cause notice or 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 annual return has been reached. 6. The learned Government Pleader does not dispute the same. 6. The learned Government Pleader does not dispute the same. On perusal of the assessment of the order, it is evident that the assessing authority passed Composite assignment Order for the periods from April, 2018 to July, 2022. 7. As this Court held that Composite Order cannot be passed for more than one assessment year, following the order dt.17.09.2025 passed in W.P.No.11028 of 2025 in the case of SJ Constructions Vs. Asst. Commissioner, the present writ petition would have to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, the assessment order dated 25.02.2023 passed by the 1 st respondent in relation to period from April, 2018 to July, 2022 and order in appeal dt.23.01.2025 passed by the 2 nd respondent are hereby set aside leaving it open to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings for each assessment year separately. Needless to say, the period from the date of passing of the impugned orders till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any shall stand closed.