Mr. Kishor Kumar Reddy vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax - Andhra Pradesh High Court, 29 April 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

\ ' \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH- (Special Original Jurisdiction) ::AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRII TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT the honourable SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN AND THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. WRIT PETITION NO: 7908 OF 20?/; RAO LAKSHMANA RAO Between: Mr. Kishor Kumar Reddy, S/o Mr. Venu Having office at H.No. 18-192/2 Tirupati-517507. / Plot Aged about 62 Flat No. 2, S.V. Towers, Yasodha years. Nagar, ...Petitioner AND '' Commissioner 524101 2/235, Opp. Court of Slate Tax, O/o AC (ST), Gudur Buildings, Venkatgiri Road, Gudur - Compound, Near Railway Gate Sullur 2. The Sub-Registrar, MRO Office Peta, Tirupati District - 524121 ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the circumstances stated i be pleased to issue a writ. Order, nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the Constitution of India in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court praying that in may dr direction more particularly one in the 'he impugned order dated 10-10-2023 read With the in orm DRC-07 vide Reference No. ZD371023006305Z dated summary 10-10- 2023 by the Respondent No. 1 under the provisions of CGST/APGST Act, 2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of Inclia, and to consequently set aside the same and/or pass such further or other* order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. b) That, consequently, the notice Form GST DRC-16 bearing 3718032596031 dated 18-03-2025 issued by the Respondent the provisions of CGST/APGST Act, 2017 directing the Respondent attach the immovabie property of the Petitioner, is void, arbitrary, illegal without Jurisdiction, without authority of law apart from Articles 14, 19{1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution consequently set aside the same ■ lA NO: 3 OF 2n?fi DIN No. 1 under No. 2 to being violative of of India, and to Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be affidavit along with may be peruse as a part and parcel pleased to permit the Petitioner to file the additional material papers and the Hon’ble Court of the Writ Petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2Q2fi Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated m the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased It is further humbly prayed that this stay the operation in Form GST DRC-16 bearing DIN 3718032596031 of the Order dated 18-03-2025 passed by Respondent No. 1 LA NO: 1 OF 209!^ Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased it is further humbly prayed that this Stay order dated 10-10-2023 read with the Reference No. Respondent No. 1 operation of impugned summary in Form DRC-07 vide 10-10-2023 passed by ZD3710230063052 dated Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents No.1, 3, 4; GP FOR COMIVIERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following: Order

1 RRR,J & Dr. YLR,J W,P.No.7908/2025 APHC010149512025 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: 7908/2025 Between: Mr. Kishor Kumar Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .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 petitioner, and learned G.P. for Commercial Tax appearing for respondents. the the 2. The petitioner was served with an assessment order, dated 10.10.2023, passed by the 1^' respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax

2 RRR, J & Dr. YLR A W.P. No. 7908/202^ Act, 2017 [for short The petitioner 18.03.2025, by the 1 immovable the GST Act”] for the period April, 2018 to March a notice in Form GST DRC 2019. was also served with -16, dated respondent, directing the 2 property of the petitioner. nd respondent to attach the pursuance of these orders, These orders have In the property of the petitioner challenged by the petitioner. has been attached. been 3- This assessment order iin Form GST DRC-07, i ’ 'deluding - signature, on the and that the provisions of Tax Act, 2017 assessment order. Sections-160 & 169 of the not rectify such a defect, this Court, in the cannot be dispensed with Central Goods and Service Following this Judgment, case of M/s. RRR,J & Dr. YLR.J W.P.No.7908/2025 Commissioner, in W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order. Another Division Bench of this Court by its Judgment, dated 19.03.2024, in the case of 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 proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Goyal 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-est and invalid.

A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster ^ on 8. Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa 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 DIN number would ^ 2022 (63) G.S.T.L 286 (SC) ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)

RRR,J & Dr. YLR.vto W. P. No. 7908/2025* Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam^, had also held that non-men,ion of a DIN number would require ,he order ,o be se, aside. In view of the 9. aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number and the assessing officer, in fhe impugned assessment order aside. absence of the signature of would have to be set

10.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition i impugned assessment order i “ the notice in Form GST DRC-16 dated respondent, with liberty to the 1 IS disposed of setting aside the in Form GST DRC-07. dated 10.10.2023 and 18.03.2025, issued by the 1®‘ respondent to conduct fresh r after giving notice and by assigning Din number and signature to order. The period from the date assessment. the said of the impugned assessment order, till the date of receipt of this Order shall Needless to say, the order of attachment be excluded for the purposes of limitation. will stand abated as the underlying order of assessment has been As a sequel, pending miscellaneous set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. applications, if any, shall stand closed. P. VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ^2024(88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.) //// SECj^ON OFFICER To 0pp":"Bu!?dingf 524101 2 The Sub-Registrar, MRO Office Compound, Near Railway Gate Sul ur Peta, Tirupati District - 524121 = vt-K.2 Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh - 521144

1.4.

The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department (Commercial Tax) A P Secretariat, Velagapudi - 522 503

One CC to SRI PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Advocate [OPUC] COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

Three CD Copies gsg

HIGH COURT DATED: 30/04/2025 \ ORDER WP.No.7908 of 2025 I 2 4 SFI* 2(125 ^ . Current seeuon $)! DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS