Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010347422025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3529]
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH 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: 20013/2025
Between:
1. MAHADEV TRANSPORT AND CONTRACTORS, REP. BY ITS
PROPRIETRIX, BODALA RADHA, 4-596, UNNAMED ROAD
KOTHURU, KANTAKAPALLE RAILWAY STATION, KOTHAVALASA
MANDAL, KANTAKAPALLE, VIZIANAGARAM-535 240, ANDHRA
PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER,
M.G.ROAD
EAST
CIRCLE,
VIZIANAGARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. DEPUTY
ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONERST,
M.G.ROAD
EAST
CIRCLE, VIZIANAGARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.
3. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF
FINANCE, 3RD FLOOR, JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, SANSAD MARG,
NEW DELHI-110 001.
4. STATE
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH,
REP.
BY
ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
5. CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS, GST
POLICY WING, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
NEW DELHI, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER (GST).
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 appropriate writ
or order or direction (a) declaring that the assessment order dated
20.08.2024 passed by the 1ST Respondent for the tax period June, 2024
under Section 62 of the GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any
valid signature, valid DIN and detailed order not uploaded consequently, set-
aside the same or (b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of
the amounts levied under the assessment order dated 20.08.2024 can be
made and that the limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of the
GST Act does not commence until the order dated 20.08.2024 is
communicated with a detailed order and uploaded on GST portal with a valid
DIN in accordance with law and 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
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
3
The Court made the following Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The petitioner was served with the assessment order, in Form
GST ASMT-13, dated 20.08.2024, passed by the 1st respondent, under the
Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the GST Act’), for the financial
year June-2024. The assessment order, in Form DRC-07 has been
challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition.
2.
The impugned assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, is
challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the
said proceedings 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
impugned 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.
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 assessment 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, in Form GST ASMT-13, dated 20.08.2024, 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 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, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date: 17.09.2025 BSM
5
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.20013 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
17-09-2025
BSM
