Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1
APHC010347372025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUSTV,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION Nos: 17606, 17670. 17709. 17714. 18000. 18175. 18177
and 18854 of 2025
WRIT PETITION No: 17606 of 2025
Between:
Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing
Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju,
65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Assistant
Commissioner,
Airport
Circle,
Visakhapatnam-ll
Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, 3"^ Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
4. Central Board
of
Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government of India,
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi,
Commissioner (GST)
rep. by
its
...RESPONDENTS
2
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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other
appropriate writ or
order or direction -
(a)
declaring that the assessment order dated 24.11.2023 passed by
the 1®‘ Respondent for the tax period August, 2023 under Section
62 of the GST Act
is void and illegal for not containing any valid
DIN and consequently, set aside the same; or
alternatively,
direct
that
no
enforcement
or
recovery
of
the
amounts levied
under the assessment order dated 24.11.2023
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
24.11.2023
is
communicated
with
a
valid
accordance with law.
(b)
DIN
in
lA 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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 24.11.2023 issued by the 1®* Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010347362025
WRIT PETITION No: 17670 OF 2025
3
Between:
M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, #65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530026, Andhra Pradesh
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by
its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Floor
Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue
(CT-II)
Department,
Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
4. Central
Board
of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government of India,
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi,
Commissioner (GST).
rep. by
its
...RESPONDENTS
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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other
appropriate writ
order or direction -
(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 27.9.2023 passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period June, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act
is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set- aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied
under the assessment order dated 27.9.2023 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 27.9.2023 is
communicated with a valid DIN
in accordance with law.
or
4
lA 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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 27.9.2023 issued by the 1®* Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counselfor the Petitioner:SRI P.KARTHIKRAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:
M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010347442025
■Id:
WRIT PETITION No: 17709 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance,
Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue
(CT-II)
Department,
Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
5
4.
Central
Board
of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government of
India,
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi,
rep.
by
its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS
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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order
direction -
or
(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period April, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act is void and
illegal for not containing any valid
DIN and
consequently, set aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied under the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 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 24.7.2023
is
communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA 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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 24.7.2023 issued by the 1®‘ Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:
M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
6
APHC010347452025
WRIT PETITION No: 17714 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju,
65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2.
Union of India, rep. by
its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
3'^^ Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3.
State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue
(CT-II)
Department.
Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
4.
Central Board
of
Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government of India,
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi,
Commissioner (GST)
rep.
by
its
...RESPONDENTS
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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other
appropriate writ or
order or direction -
(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 20.5.2023 passed by the
Respondent for the tax period March, 2023 under Section 62 of
the GST Act is
void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set aside the same; or
St
1
7
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied
under the assessment order dated 20.5.2023 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 20.5.2023 is
communicated with a valid DIN
in accordance with law.
lA No: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed ir> support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 20.5.2023 issued by the 1®' Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:
M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
•APHC010351962025
WRIT PETITION No: 18000 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
8
2. Union of India, rep. by
its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
3'^'^ Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue
(CT-II) Department,
Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
4.
Central
Board
of
Indirect Taxes and
Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government of India,
Ministry of Finance. New Delhi
Commissioner (GST).
rep.
by
its
...RESPONDENTS
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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other
appropriate writ
order or direction -
(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period May, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act is
void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set- aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied
under the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 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 24.7.2023 is
communicated with a valid DIN
in accordance with law.
lA 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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 24.7.2023 issued by the 1®‘ Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as othe.rwise the Petitioner 'wil! be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
or
9
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:
M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
.APHC010352082025
WRIT PETITION No: 18175 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. Veera Mohana
Krishna
Engineering Works
Partner, Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent
School, New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
rep.
by
its
Managing
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2.
Union of India, rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
3'"* Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3.
State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue
(CT-II)
Department,
Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
4.
Central
Board
of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government of
India,
Ministry
of Finance, New
Delhi,
rep.
by
its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit fifed therewith, the High Court may be
pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or
order or direction -
10
(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 27.9.2023 passed by the
1st Respondent for the tax period July, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act
is
void and illegal for not containing any valid
DIN and
consequently, set-aside
the same or
(b) alternatively, direct that no
enforcement
or
recovery
of
the
amounts
levied
assessment
order
dated
27.9.2023
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 27.9.2023 is communicated
with a valid DIN
in accordance with law.
lA 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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 27.9.2023 issued by the 1®' Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:
M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010352092025
under
the
WRIT PETITION No: 18177 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
11
AND
1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue
(CT-II)
Department,
Secretariat,
Velagapudi,
Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
4. Central
Board
of
Indirect Taxes and
Customs, GST
Policy Wing,
Government
of
India,
Ministry
of Finance, New
Delhi,
rep.
by
its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Fligh Court may be
pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other
appropriate writ or
order or direction -
(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 21.10.2022 passed by the
1®' Respondent for the tax period August, 2022 under Section 62 of
the GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied
under the assessment order dated 21.10.2022 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 21.10.2022 is
communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA 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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 21.10.2022 issued by the 1®‘ Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
12
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
APHC010270792025
WRIT PETITION No: 18854 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. S. Ravindra Reddy Contractor, Rep. by its Proprietor, Mr.
S. Ravindra
Reddy,
8-117-12-2R,
Edganagar,
Banaganapalli-518124,
Kurnool
District,
Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Nandya!-ll Circle, Kunrool
District
Andhra Pradesh.
2. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue
(CT-II) Department
Guntur District.
3. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary (Finance)
Ministry of Finance
North Block New Delhi 110001
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
...RESPONDENTS
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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other
appropriate writ
order or direction
declaring
the
action
of the
1"' Respondent
in
issuing
assessment orders dated 30.1.2020 for the period 2018-19 under the Goods
and Service lax Act, 201 ( in Form DRC -07
(both CGST and SGST) without
or
13
generating the Document Identification
Number (DIN) on the summary order or the show cause notice as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to redo the assessment following the principles of natural justice including the procedure under Rule 142(1A) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. lA 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 to grant stay of recovery of the disputed demand pursuant to the impugned assessment orders dated 30.1.2020 (both COST and SGST) passed by the 1®* Respondent for the tax period 2018-19, pending disposal of the Writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI SRINIVASARAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following Common Order:
1 RRR, J & JS, J W.P.Nos. 17606 of 2025 & batch APHC010299732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTYSECONDDAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION Nos. 17606.17670, 17709. 17714. 18000. 18175 18177 & 18854 of 2025 [3541] W.P.No:17606/2025 Between: Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER AND Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:17670/2025 Between: Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works AND ...PETITIONER Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:17709/2025 Between: M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER AND Assistant Commissioner St and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:17714/2Q25 Between: M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, AND Assistant Commissioner ST and Others ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: TKARTHiK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:18000/2025 Between; Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER AND Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:18175/2025 Between: M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, ...PETITIONER AND Assistant Commissioner St and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:18177/2025 Between: Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER AND Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX W.P.No:18854/2025 Between: S Ravindra Reddy Contractor ...PETITIONER AND The Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following common order: (per Hoh’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) This batch of Writ Petitions are being disposed of, by way of this common order, on account of the fact that the issues raised in these Writ petitions are identical.
2.In all these cases petitioners, who are registered under the GST regime, have approached this Court challenging assessment orders passed against them. The main ground for challenge, in all these cases is the lack of a Document Identification Number on the orders, passed by the assessing officers.
3.Under the GST Act, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, has been given power to issue guidelines and directions to the tax authorities, for the purposes of better compliance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made under the acts. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, in 4. exercise of this power under Section 168(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, had issued a Circular bearing No. 122/41/2019-GST, dated 05.11.2019. In this Circular, the board stated that in keeping with the Government’s objectives of transparency and accountability in indirect tax administration, a system for electronic generation of a Document Identification Number has been put in place and that all communications sent by any authority would have to include a Document Identification Number. It was further stipulated that the presence of a Document Identification Number is a mandatory requirement and that every document, communication and proceedings issued under the provisions of the CGST Act and Rules should contain a Document Identification Number. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs had then issued a subsequent Circular dated 23.12.2019 bearing Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST stating that any specified communication which does not bear electronic generated document identification number would be treated as invalid and deemed to have never been issued. This Circular came to be considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Goyal vs. Union of India''. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had specially mentioned this Circular which requires to be followed. Earlier, Writ Petitions, challenging orders of assessment 5. which did not contain a Document Identification Number and even orders containing Document Identification Numbers where the show cause notice or other communications preceding such an assessment order were filed. This Court, in these cases, including the judgment of this Court in Cluster Enterprises vs The Deputy Assistant Commissioner^., had held that the absence of the Document Identification Number would ^ (2022) 63 GSTL 286(SC) ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L page 179(A.P)
7 .RRR,J & JS,J W.P, No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch invalidate the order of assessment. Following these judgments, this Court has consistently been setting aside any assessment order which does not contain a Document Identification Number and is remanding the same back to the assessing authority for passing appropriate orders in accordance with law. The petitioners, in this batch of Writ Petitions, also challenge the assessment orders passed without including a Document Identification Number. The details of the Writ Petitions and the dates which the impugned assessment orders have been passed are set out in the table given below: on Writ Petition Number Petitioner Date of Assessment order challenged 24/11/2023 Explanation for the delay 1. 17606 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works Show cause notice and Assessment Order is not sePv'ed on the illiterate petitioner who was depending on part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond to the notice and assessment order 2025 2 17670 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works 27/09/2023 Show cause notice and Assessment Order is not served on the illiterate petitioner who was depending on part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond to the notice and assessment order 2025 3. 17709 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works 24/07/2023 No DIN, accordingly limitation period for appeal under 107 does not start(accordingly no delay), Show cause notice and Assessment Order is not served on the illiterate petitioner who was depending 2025 RRR,J&JS,J part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond to the notice and assessment order. Show cause Assessment Order served on the on 4. 17714 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works 20/05/2023 notice anc is not illiterate petitioner who was depending on part time accountant,
accordingly could not responc to the notice and assessment order 2025 5. 18000 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works 24/07/2023 No DIN, accordingly limitation period for appeal under 107 does not start(accordingly no delay). Show cause notice and Assessment Order is not served on the illiterate petitioner who was depending on part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond to the notice and assessment order. Show cause notice and Assessment Order is not served on the illiterate petitioner who was depending on parttime accountant,
accordingly could not respond to the notice and assessment order Show Assessment Order is served on the illiterate petitioner who was depending part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond to the notice and assessment order. Petitioner could not respond to the show cause notice due to the fact that all the notices appear to have been uploaded on the portal and no physical notices were furnished to the petitioner. There was no proper opportunity to contest the matter. 2025 6. 18175 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works 27/09/2023 2025 7. 18177 of Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works 21/10/2022 cause notice and 2025 not on 8. 18854 of Ravindra Reddy 30/01/2020 2025
6.As can be seen from the said table above, the orders under challenge have been passed quite some time back and there is significant delay in challenging these orders. The affidavits filed in support of these Writ Petitions have also sought to explain the delay. The reasons given for the delay, in approaching this Court, are also set out in the table above.
7.This Court has heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in the present batch of cases as well as the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Central Taxation Authorities.
8.The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the instructions issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs are binding on the authorities and the lack of a Document Identification Number in an assessment order would render the said assessment order a nullity and the said order would be a void order. It is contended that once an order is void, no steps can be taken for collection of tax on the basis of such orders and for all practicable purposes, there !S no order of assessment in existence. In such a situation, this Court by ueuiaring the obvious, that the orders are void, and permitting the assessing authorities to undertake fresh assessments, would only be beneficial to the depailrnent apart from being beneficial to the registered persons who have suffered these orders. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the question of laches or delay would not arise as the impugned order is itself a dead letter which cannot be revived and the orders of this Court setting aside such orders would only clarify and allay any confusion or ambiguity about the status of such orders. '
9.The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes well as the learned Standing Counsel for the Central Taxation Authorities would contend that the language in the circulars only stipulates that such order are invalid. Such orders would not amount to void orders. In that view of the matter, the orders would remain in force and are enforceable unless set-aside by this Court. Where such an order is necessary, it would be essential that the petitioners, seeking such orders, approach this Court expeditiously. Failure to approach this Court within a reasonable period of time would amount to laches and this Court would have the discretion to refuse relief on the ground of laches. as 10. The instructions issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs are instructions issued under Section 168 of the CGST Act. Section 168 of the CGST Act reads as follows; Section 168. Power to issue instructions or directions. (1) The Board may, if it considers it necessary or expedient so to do for the purpose of uniformity in the implementation of this Act, issue such orders, instructions or directions to the central tax officers as it may deem fit, and thereupon all such officers and all other persons employed in the implementation of this Act shall observe and follow such orders, instructions or directions. (2) The Commissioner specified in clause (91) of section 2, sub-section (3) of section 5, clause (b) of sub section (9) of section 25, sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 35, sub-section (1) of section 37, sub-section (6) of section 39, ^[section 44], sub-sections (4) and (5) of section 52,] ^[sub-section (1) of section 143, except the second proviso thereof], clause (I) of sub-section (3) of section 158 and section 167 shall mean a Commissioner or Joint Secretary posted in the Board and such Commissioner or Joint Secretary shall exercise the powers specified in the said sections with the approval of the Board. The language in this provision of law makes it abundantly clear that the power granted under this provision is only the power to issue instructions to the taxation authorities. Such instructions would be binding on the taxation authorities. Violation of such instructions may invalidate the orders passed by the taxation authorities. Such violation would not result in the orders becoming void. Once the orders are only invalid, they would remain in force until they are declared to be invalid by an appropriate Court or authority of appropriate juri iction.
11.12.Therefore, the orders under challenge, would continue to be effective unless set aside by this Court. Once such a declaration is required from this Court, it would also be necessary for this Court to consider the question of laches in approaching this Court.
13.In all the Writ Petitions, before this Court, the reasons set out for the delay in approaching this Court is either the alleged inability of the petitioners in perusing the orders which have uploaded in the portal or that there is no limitation for the exercise of appellate juri iction, under Section 107, as service of orders without a Document Identification Number, would not amount to service and by analogy, there would be limitation or reasonable period within which one has to approach this Court. no 14. Both these reasons cannot be accepted by this Court. The contention that the registered persons/dealers were unaware of the service of the impugned orders in the portal cannot be accepted ground for condoning delay. Acceptance of such a plea would throw open the doors for filing of Writ Petitions against the orders which have been passed years back. In fact most of the Writ petitions in the present batch are cases where orders had been passed in the year 2023 itself. Further, the prescribed method of service of notices and orders includes service of the order through the portal being maintained by the GST Authorities. as a f Once such a method of service has been included the contention that such 3ctua[ notice of service to the registered in the Act and Rules, service is not sufficient service and did not give persons cannot be accepted.
15.The contention that Identification Number would there was such a stipulation service of an order without a Document amount to no service, would be acceptable if or provision either in the Act or in the Rules. This stipulation is said to be available in the circulars issued by the CBIC. However, such circulars. are at best instructions to the taxation authorities and the petitioners, having received the orders in the portal cannot claim ignorance of these orders. The inordinate delay, in approaching this court, has not been satisfactorily explained and these petitions cannot be entertained at this length of time.
16.For the above reasons, we decline to interfere with the impugned orders set out above. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. StIA G.HELA NAIDU assistant registrar //// Vp SECTION OFFICER To,
1.One CC to Sri P. Karthik Ramana, Advocate [OPUC]
15
2.One CC to Sri Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, Advocate [OPUC]
3.Two CCs to GP for Commercial Tax. High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]
4.One CC to O/o. Deputy Solicitor General of India, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OPUC]
5.One CC to M/s. Santhi Chandra, SC for Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs. [OPUC]
6.Two CD Copies. gi ? Hpv - I
16 HIGH COURT DATED:22/08/2025 COMMON ORDER WP.No’s: 17606, 17670, 17709, 17714, 18000,18175, 18177 and 18854 of 2025 5 15 SEP 2025 g ^ ^ Currwil Sactlon s. DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS
