Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010506832025
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: 26380/2025
Between:
1. M/S.BAVARCHI,
GSTIN-37AAUPH8545F2Z6
REP.
BY
ITS
PROPRIETOR, MR. ABDUL KADIR HASSAN 29-1-23, MALLADI VARI
STREET,
GOVERNORPET-520002,
VIJAYAWADA
ANDHRA
PRADESH
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, GOVERNOTPET CIRCLE,
VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, AXIS BANK LIMITED D.N0.59A, 1-7,
GROUND FLOOR, MATHA TOWERS, RING ROAD, NEAR BENZ
CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA
3. STATE
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH,
REP.
BY
ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE)
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001
...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other
2
appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1st
Respondent in issuing assessment order dated 21.2.2025 for the period
2022-23 under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 in summary of
assessment order Form DRC -07,notice inASMT-10 and intimation in DRC-
01A, without signing either physically or digitally and without affixing
document identification number and. as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the
provisions of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and in gross violation of
principles of natural justice as the order was passed without issuing show
cause notice, and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to redo the
assessment following the principles of natural justice setting aside the
impugned orders and notices and pass such
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
may be pleased to grant stay of recovery of the disputed demand pursuant to
the impugned assessment order dated 21.2.2025 passed by the Respondent
for the tax period 2022-23 under the Good and Service Tax Act, 2017,
pending disposal of the Writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to
severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
2. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
3
The Court made the following Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The petitioner was served with the assessment order, dated
21.02.2025, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax
Act, 2017 [for short ‘the GST Act’], for the financial year 2022-23. This order
has been challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition.
2.
This order, dated 21.02.2025 is challenged by the petitioner, on
various grounds, including the ground that the said Order do not contain the
signature of the assessing officer.
3.
Learned
Government
Pleader
for
Commercial
Tax,
on
instructions, submits that there is no signature of the assessing officer, on the
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.
4
6.Following the aforesaid Judgments, the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the Order.
7.This Court is also cognisant 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 a relevant factor.
8.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the assessment order, dated 21.02.2025, passed 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 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: 24.09.2025 BSM
5
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.26380 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
25-09-2025
BSM
