Merco Infrastructure Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIA - Andhra Pradesh High Court, 02 July 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

APHC010327882024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH^ AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 11 THURSDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JUSTipE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 16537 OF 2024 Between: M/s Merco Infrastructure Private Limited, 12-13-15, Ganta Vari Pandurangapet, Tenali, Guntur - 522202, Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Authorized Representative Mr. Rajkumar janakiram Street, ...Petitioner AND 1. The Union of India, rep. by its Secretary (Finance), Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Secretary to the Government, Revenue (CT) Department, A.P. Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tenali Circle, Floor, Municipal Complex, Market Area, Tenali - District, Andhra Pradesh. Guntur-1 Division, III 522201, Guntur 4. The Goods and Service Tax Council, Council, Janpath Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110 001 Rep. by its Secretary, GST Bharti Building, Secretariat, 5th Floor, Tower-11, Jeevan i 5. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Rep. by its Chairman, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, ' Central Secretariat, New Delhi-110 001. ...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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly in the nature of Mandamus i. Declaring that the impugned Notification No. 56/2023, Central Tax, dated 28-12-2023, issued by the First and 5th Respondents, and the impugned G.O. Ms. No. 221, Revenue (Commercial Taxes) Department, dated 17-05-2023 issued by the Second Respondent, under S. 168-A of the COST Act, 2017, extending the Period of Limitation prescribed u/S. 73(10) of the COST Act, 2017, for the Financial Year 2018-19, till 30-04-2024, ultravires Section 168-A of the COST Act, 2017, manifestly arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, illegal and consequently quash the same. are ii. Declaring the impugned Order, vide Case ID AD37012400652IN / Ref. No. ZD370424030176I dated 30-04-2024, passed by the Third Respondent for the Financial Year 2018-19 under the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017, as barred by limitation, contrary to law, without jurisdiction, unjustified unsustainable and illegal and consequently set aside the same, and iii. Declaring S. 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017, as violative of Articles 14, 19 (1)(g) and 300-A of the Constitution of India or in the alternative hold that S. 16(4) is not applicable to the present case or declare that the period of limitation prescribed in S. 16(4) is only procedural in nature and that S. 16(2) has overriding effect over S. 16(4) while claiming eligible input tax in the respective monthly GSTR 3B return. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 all further proceedings including collection of tax, interest and penalty pursuant to the impugned Order, vide Case ID: AD37012400652IN / Ref. No. ZD3704240301761 dated 30-04-2024, dated 30-04-2024 the Third Respondent for the Financial Year 2018-19 under the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017. passed by Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G NARENDRA CHETTY.^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 4: SRI VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No. 5: SRI SANTHI CHANDRA SC FOR CBIC

The Court made the following order:

W.P.No.16537 of 2024 ' APHC010327882024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3446] THUR AY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION No: 16537 of 2024 Between: Merco Infrastructure Private Limited ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) 2.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 0^ HCJ &RRR, J The Court made the following Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri G. Narendra Chetty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned G.P. for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents.

The petitioner is a registered person under GST Regime. The petitioner was subjected to an assessment order, dated 30.04.2024, passed by the 3"'^ respondent, under Section 73(5) of the CGST and SGST Act, 2017 for the financial year 2018-19. 3. This order is challenged by the petitioner, in this writ petition, on various grounds. The primary grounds of challenge are that the order is beyond limitation and that the order does not contain DIN number and also the Signature of the Assessing Officer. On the ground of limitation, the petitioner contends that the period 4. of limitation for the year 2018-19 expires on 31.03.2023 while the impugned order was passed on 30.04.2024. It is the case of the petitioner that this impugned order came to be passed on 30.04.2023 on the basis of extension of time granted under G.O.Ms.No.221 Revenue (CT) Department, dated 17.05.2023, which extended the time for passing of assessment order under Section 73. The said G.O.Ms.No.221 has also been challenged in the present writ petition on the ground that the said G.O. does not meet the requirements of Section 168-A of the GST Act, which empowers the Government to extend W.P,No.16537 of 2024 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. M/s. 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. The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number on 7. proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon’ble W.P.No.16537of2024 Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Goya! Vs. Union of India & Ors\ 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 non-estand invalid.

A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s.Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa^, 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 Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam^, had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number and absence of the signature of the assessing officer, in the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside.

10.

In view of the fact that the impugned order is being set aside on the ground of absence of DIN number and signature in the assessment order, ‘ 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L 179 (A.P.) " 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)

of limitation and the validity of G.O.Ms.No.221 is not being the question decided in this case, and the same is left open.

Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of.There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

11.

M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //// SECTTON OFFICER To,

The Secretary (Finance), Union of India, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001. 2. The Secretary to the Government, Revenue (CT) Department, State of Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat District, Andhra Pradesh

The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tenali Circle, Guntur-1 Division, III 522201, Guntur Municipal Complex, Market Area, Tenali - Floor, District, Andhra Pradesh.

The Secretary, Goods and Service Tax Council, GST Council, Secretariat, 5th Floor, Tower-11, Jeevan Bharti Building, Janpath Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110 001. 5. The Chairman, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi-110 001. 6. One CC to Sri. G Narendra Chetty Advocate [OPUCJ”

One CC to Sri. Venna Hemanth Kumar(Centrai Government Counsel) [OPUC]

One CC to Sri. Santhi Chandra SC for CBIC [OPUC]

Two CCs to GP for Commercial Tax High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CD Copies 10. gsc

c HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 16537 OF 2024 [ 31 JUL 2025 yoo * DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS