Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1
APHC010519042025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3529]
WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 26681/2025
Between:
1. MONTECARLO BANGALORE CHENNAI EXPRESSWAY P2P1 PVT
LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER - F AND A,
SHRI MALAY SHAILESHBHAI VAISHNAV, PROJECT OFFICE,
MONTECARLO, NEAR MULBAGAL ROAD, VENKATAGIRIKOTA,
TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 424.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES 1,
PALAMNER CIRCLE, CHITTOOR DIVISION, D.NO 22-424/2, THIRD
FLOOR, CT COMPLEX, BESIDE DEVI THEATRE, TIRUPATI ROAD,
KATTAMANCHI, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 001.
2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX APPEALS, FLAT
NOS. 101 AND 102, THUNGA RESIDENCY, 19TH WARD, POSTAL
COLONY RESIDENTIAL AREA. RANI PARANTHAKA DEVI MARG
RENIGUNTA ROAD, TIRUPATI - 517 501.
3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (COMMERCIAL
TAX) A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI.
4. UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE) NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
2
...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 a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or
order quashing the proceedings of the 1st Respondent passed in the
Assessment Order passed in Form GST DRC 07 vide Ref No.
ZD371124006803P dated 07.11.2024 (Annexure P-1) (hereinafter referred to
as demand order) for the period FY 2022-23, as the said demand order was
passed without mentioning any Valid Document Identification Number (DIN)
and the said order was passed without considering the materials evidences
available in the GSTN portal and submissions filed by the Petitioner as
invalid, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, unreasonable, and in violation of the
principles of natural justice and contrary to Article 14, 19(1)(g), Article 265,
Article 300Aofthe Constitution of India. b. The Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order quashing the
Order for Rejection of the Rectification Application vide Ref No.
ZD370525007194I dated 07.05.2025 (Annexure P-4), was passed without
granting the option of personal hearing, which is in violation of the provisions
of Section 161 of the GST Act, 2017 and also in violation of the principles of
natural justice. c. The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus or any other writ, direction or order setting aside the recovery
made from the Electronic Credit Ledger amounting to Rs. 49,31,772/- (IGST)
in respect of the demands confirmed vide the above demand order is invalid,
arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and in violation of provisions of Section 78 and
79 of the GST Act, 2017 and order for re-credit of the ITC to the Electronic
Credit Ledger. d. And to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
2.
The Court made the following:
The Court made the following:
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
3
The petitioner was served by an assessment order, dated 07.11.2024,
passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for
short “the GST Act”] for the period 2022-23, this order has been challenged by
the petitioner.
2.
This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, is challenged by
the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said
proceedings did not contain a DIN number.
3.
Learned
Government
Pleader
for
Commercial
Tax,
on
instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned
assessment order.
4.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 invalid.
5.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
1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) 2 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)
4 non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.
6.In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside.
7.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 07.11.2024, issued by the 1st respondent, with liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a DIN number to the said order. The period from the date of the impugned assessment orders, 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, miscellaneous application pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J
RJS
3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)
5
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.26681 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
RJS
