BharatTaxGST

Harika Cable Vision vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax

Original PDF →
WP/33395/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01064343202502 December 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,T.C.D.SEKHAR6 pages
For Petitioner: J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMARFor Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010643432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD 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 NO: 33395/2025 Between: 1. HARIKA CABLE VISION, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING PARTNER - SRI KARANAM VENKATESWARA RAO GROUND FLOOR, 22-6-19/2, KOTHAPET, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. PIN - 522201. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, TENALI CIRCLE, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH PIN 522 201. 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF A.P. REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR (DISTRICT), AP, PIN -522 503 ...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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, setting aside the impugned claimed summary of the show-cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 06-03-2025 issued under Section 73 of the GST Acts and the claimed orders dated 05-06-2025 and the proceeding dated 03- 06-2025 respectively allegedly issued under Section 73 2 of the CGST Acts, 2017 and APGST Acts, 2017 and the IGST Act, 2017 by the Respondent No. 1 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 to stay the collection of the disputed tax of Rs.5, 80,924 the disputed penalty of Rs.90,606 and the disputed interest of Rs.2,29,370 (Total Rs.9,00,900); and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. 3

The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Heard Sri J.N.Venkata Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents.

2.

The petitioner was served with a summary of the assessment order in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 05.06.2025 vide Reference No.ZD370625005851E, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period from April, 2022 to March, 2023. This summary of the assessment order of the 1st respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition.

3.

This summary of the assessment order is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said order did not contain a DIN number.

4.

Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned summary of the assessment order in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 05.06.2025. 5. The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number on the order, 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 & Ors 1. The Hon’ble

1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)

4

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 invalid.

6.

A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa 2, on the basis of the circular, dated 23.12.2019, bearing No.128/47/2019-GST, issued by the C.B.I.C., had held that non-mention of a DIN number would mitigate against non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

7.

In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside.

8.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order, dated 05.06.2025 in FORM GST DRC-07, issued by the 1st respondent, with liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said order. The period from the date of the impugned summary of the assessment order, till

2 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.) 3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)

5

the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. 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: 03.12.2025 KA

6

201 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 33395/2025 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.