Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010523322025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3529]
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 27347/2025
Between:
1. M/S.SRI
PARAMESWARA
COTTON
TRADERS,,
D.NO.5-94,
TADIKONDA
MANDAL,
GUNTUR-AMARAVATI
ROAD,
NIDUMUKKALA - 522 016. GUNTUR DISTRICT. STATE OF ANDHRA
PRADESH.
REP.
BY
ITS
PROPRIETOR
MR.PEDDINENI
SATYANARAYANA
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STII, MANGALAGIRI
CIRCLE, MANGALAGIRI.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT,
AMARAVATI.
...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 Wirt of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or
Order or Direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in passing the
Proceedings in Form GST DRC- 07, dated 30.06.2025 and Summary of the
Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 30.06.2025, for the tax period April, 2024
to December, 2024 under Section 74 of the IGST/CGST/SGST Act, 2017,
neither served nor uploaded the Summary of Show Cause Notice, without
2
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.27347 of 2025
signature in the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated
30.06.2025 as per the provisions of the IGST/CGST/SGST Act 2017, without
considering the objections of the Petitioner, as arbitrary, contrary to the
provisions of the Act and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule
of Law and consequently set aside / quash the Proceedings in Form GST
DRC-07, dated 30.06.2025 and Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07,
dated 30.06.2025 issued by the 1st Respondent as null and void
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
pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings, pursuant to the Proceedings
in Form GST DRC-07, dated 30.06.2025 and Summary of the Order in Form
GST DRC-07, dated 30.06.2025 passed by the 1®* Respondent for the tax
period April, 2024 to December, 2024 under the IGST/CGST/SGST Act 2017,
pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will
be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
3
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.27347 of 2025
The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
The petitioner was served with a summary of the assessment order, in
FORM GST DRC-07, dated 30.06.2025, passed by the 1st respondent, under
the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] for the periods
April 2024 to December 2024. This order has been challenged by the
petitioner in the present writ petition.
2.
This summary of the assessment order is challenged by the
petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceeding
does not contain the signature of the assessing officer.
3.
The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on
instructions, submits that there is no signature of the assessing officer, on the
impugned summary of the assessment order.
4.Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, would not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment, another Division Bench of this Court, in the case of M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, in W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order.
5.Another Division Bench of this Court by its Judgment, dated 19.03.2024, in the case of M/s. SRS Traders Vs The. Assistant Commissioner ST & ors, in W.P.No.5238 of 2024, following the aforesaid two Judgments, had held that the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order.
6.Following the aforesaid Judgments, the impugned summary of the assessment order would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned order.
7.This Court is also cogent of the fact that the impugned order has been passed some time back and the present Writ Petition has been filed with delay. However, Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 stipulates that service of notice or orders, without signature, would not amount to service at all. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras, in T.V.L. Deepa Traders vs. The Deputy Commissioner (W.P.No.19277 of 2024, dated 13.08.2024) had held the same view. Consequently, there is no service of the impugned order even as of today, on account of the absence of signature on the impugned proceeding. In those circumstances, the delay in approaching this Court would not be a relevant factor.
8.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned summary of the assessment order, dated 30.06.2025, issued by the 1st respondent, with liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a signature to the said order. The period from the date of the impugned summary of the assessment order, till 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: 08.10.2025
MJA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO:27347 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
MJA
