Kishor Kumar Reddy vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
pass such further or other order(s) may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, b) That, consequently, the notice Form GST DRC-16 bearing DIN 3718032596031 dated 18-03-2025 issued by the Respondent the provisions of CGST/APGST Act, 2017 directing the Respondent to attach the immovable property of the Petitioner, is void, arbitrary, illegal without juri iction, without authority of law apart from Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the No. 1 under No. 2 being violative of Constitution of India, and to consequently set aside the same and/or as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and case. pass such further or other order(s) proper in the circumstances of this lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased prayed that this Stay operation of impugned order dated 10-10- praying that in the circumstances
2023 read with the summary in Form DRC-07 vide Reference No. ZD371023006309R dated 10-10-2023 passed by Respondent No lA NO: 2 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 pleased TO stay the operation of the Order in Form GST DRC-16 bearing DIN 3718032596031 dated 18-03-2025 passed by Respondent No. 1 and pass may be lA NO: 3 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 permit the Petitioner to file the affidavit along with material papers and the Hon’ble Court may be peruse as a part and parcel of the Writ Petition. additional Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following:
RRR,J & Dr. YLR.J- APHC010149452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3536] WEDNE AY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7934/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Kishor Kumar Reddy AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
The Court made the following Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri P. Venkata Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and learned G.P. for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.
2 RRR,J & Dr. YLR.J W.P. No.7934/2025
The petitioner was served with an assessment order, dated 10.10.2023, passed by the 1 Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] for the The petitioner was also served with 18.03.2025, by the 1 respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax period April, 2022 to March 2023. a notice in Form GST DRC-16, dated respondent, directing the 2 immovable property of the petitioner. nd respondent to attach the In pursuance of these orders , the attached. These orders have been property of the petitioner has been challenged by the petitioner.
This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, i the petitioner. !S challenged by ground that the said assessing officer and also on various grounds, including the proceeding does not contain the signature of the DIN number, on the impugned assessment order. Learned Government Pleader instructions, submits that there i does not contain DIN number The effect of the absence of the order was earlier considered by this Court 4. for Commercial Tax on - Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment provisions of and Service Tax Act, 2017, would another Division Bench of pr RRR,J & Dr. YLR,J 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-inciusion of DIN number on proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon’ble 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 7. referred to as “C.B.I.C.”), had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be non-est and 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, 8. issued by the C.B.I.C., had held that non-mention of a DIN number would mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of ^ 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)
4 RRR,J & Dr. YLR,J^J|^ W.P. No. 7934/2025^^ Deputy Commissioner. Speciai Circie, 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.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 10.10.2023 the notice in Form GST DRC-16 dated , and 18.03.2025, issued by the 1®' respondent, with liberty to the 1®‘ respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning Din number and 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. Needless to say, the order of attachment will stand abated as the underlying order of assessment has been set aside. There shail be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shail stand closed. Cd/. A. VENU GOPAL RAO assistant registrar OFFICER 3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.) //// SECTl To,
The Deputy Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, O/o AC (ST), Gudur Circle, D. No. 2/235, 0pp. Court Buildings, Venkatgiri Road, Gudur - 524101. 2. The Sub-Registrar, MRO Office Compound, Near Railway Gate SullurPeta, Tirupati District - 524121
The Chief Commissioner of State Tax, D. Apartments, Bandar Road, Edupugallu Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh - 521144
The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra No. 5-59, RK Spring Valley Village, KankipaduMandal, Pradesh, Revenue Department (Commercial Tax), A P Secretariat, Velagapudi- 522 503
One CC to SRI. PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCS to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]
Three CD Copies sree i
HIGH COURT DATED:30/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.7934 of 2025 I t1 SEP 2im « ^ . Current Section DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.