M/S. Radhika Metals And Minerals vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The petitioner herein, which is registered under the GST Act, was subjected to order of assessment, dated 31.08.2024. An appeal filed against the said order came to be rejected, on the ground that, the appeal has been filed beyond the period of limitation provided for filing of such appeal.
Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the petitioner has approached this Court, on the ground that, the order of assessment does not contain a DIN number.
The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number on proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Goyal Vs. Union of India & Ors1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, after noticing the provisions of the Act and the circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (herein referred to as “C.B.I.C.”), had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be non-est and invalid.
Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, would contend that the petitioner having availed the remedy of appeal and having failed in the said appeal, cannot be permitted to challenge the order of assessment.
1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)
4
A Division Bench of this Court, in its order, dated 18.12.2023, in W.P.No.31675 of 2023, had held, in similar circumstances that a challenge to the original order would be maintainable even if the appeal has been disposed of.
Following the said Judgment, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order, dated 31.08.2024, and remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer, for passing fresh order in accordance with law. Needless to say, the period from the date of the impugned assessment order, till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. The submission of learned Government Pleader that the question of limitation also needs to be considered and the same should be left open. Accordingly, the question of limitation is left open along with all other issues raised. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
_________________ T.C.D.SEKHAR, J
Date 03.12.2025 KA
5
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 33047/2025
Date 03.12.2025 KA
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.