Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010432362025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3529]
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD 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: 22600/2025
Between:
1. R R TRADERS, REPRESENTED BY THE PROPRIETORSRI
MOHAMMAD
RASULKHAN,
DOOR
NO12-7-39,
MATTAVARI
STREET, TARAPET, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH. PIN - 520001.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. DEPUTY
ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER
OF
STATE
TAX,
VIJAYAWADA DIVISION-I, D.NO 74-14-2B, 4TH FLOOR, KRISHNA
NAGAR, YANAMALAKUDURU ROAD,VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-PIN 520007.
2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX APPEALS, 40-5-
19/9B,
BACK
OF
NVKR
TOWERS,
MOGALRAJAPURAM,
VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH PIN 520010
3. 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
2
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.22600 of 2025
pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus, setting aside the impugned claimed Intimation of
Tax Ascertained in Part-A of the Form GST DRC-01A and its summary, the
claimed show- cause Notice dated 28-06-2024 and its summary in Form GST
DRC-01 dated 26- 06-2024 and the claimed alleged adjudication orders and
its alleged summary in Form GST DRC-07 both dated 30-07-2024 issued
under Section 73 of the CGST Acts, 2017 and APGST Acts, 2017 and the
IGST Act, 2017 by the Respondent No1 and also the endorsement dated 22-
07-2025 issued by the Respondent No2 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
pleased to stay the collection of the disputed tax of Rs. 10,79,550, the
disputed penalty of Rs. 107955 and the disputed interest of Rs. 102217
(Total Rs.12,89,722); and to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
3
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.22600 of 2025
The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
The petitioner was served with an assessment order, in FORM GST
DRC-07, dated 30.07.2024, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods
and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] for the period 2023-2024.
This order has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition.
2.
This 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 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 assessment order would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned assessment 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 signatue 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 assessment order, dated 30.07.2024, 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 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: 03.09.2025
MJA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO:22600 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
MJA
