M/S. Mekala Sudhakar vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner(State Tax)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS holding that the impugned Ex-
iparte, Best Judgment Assessment Orders passed by the First Respondent * \nder S. 62 of the AP SGST and COST Acts, 2017, for the Months of July, September, October, and November, 2023, vide Reference No. ZD3710230072414, dated 12-10-2023 Reference No. ZD371223005772N, dated 11-12-2023 Reference No. ZD370124000659J, dated 02-01- 2024 and Reference No. ZD370124016549E, dated 25-01- 2024 respectively, which do not contain any electronically generated DINs, which do not contain any Signatures/Digital Signatures and are unsigned orders, without any reasons, without basis or material, without serving show cause notice and without affording opportunity of personal hearing are arbitrary, capricious, invalid, non-est, not orders in the eye of law, violative of the principles of natural justice, contrary to law and illegal, and consequently set aside the same ' 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 all further proceedings, including recovery of tax, interest and penalty, pursuant to the impugned Ex-Parte, Best Judgment Assessment Orders passed by the First Respondent under S. 62 of the AP SGST and CGST Acts, 2017, for the Months of July, September, October, and November, 2023, vide Reference No. ZD3710230072414, dated 12- 10-2023; Reference No. ZD371223005772N, dated 11-12-2023; Reference No. ZD370124000659J, dated 02-01-2024; and Reference No. ZD370124016549E, dated 25-01-2024 respectively Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondents No.1, 2: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.3: None The Court made the following: Order
Al-‘tlC010166732025 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: 8609/2025 Between: M/s. Mekala Sudhakar, ...PETITIONER AND The Deputy Assistant Commissionerstate Tax and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following Order: (perHonwesn justice R.RaghunaudanRao) ...RESPONDENT(S) The petitioner was served with the assessment orders, in Form GST DRC-07, Reference No.ZD3710230072414, dated 12.10.2023, NO.ZD371223005772N, dated Reference dated 02.01.2024 11.12.2023, Reference Reference NO.ZD371024016549E, dated 25.01.2024, passed by the 1"* respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period July, September, October and November, 2023. These orders have been challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. NO.ZD371024000659J and These assessment orders, in Form GST DRC-07, are challenged 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 officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order. 5. assessing
The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number 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 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. on ‘ 2022 (1&3K.S.T.L 286 (SC)
3
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 DIN number would 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 these impugned assessment orders would have to be set aside.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, Reference No.ZD37102300724 14, dated 12.10.2023, Reference No.ZD371223005772N, dated 11.12.2023, Reference No.ZD371024000659J, dated 02.01.2024 and Reference No.ZD371024016549E, dated 25.01.2024, passed by the 1®* respondent, with liberty to the 1®' respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a signature and a DIN number 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. 9. ^2024(88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.) ^2024(88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.) M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT RE^TRAR SECTION OFFICER //// To,
The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Pulivendula Circle, Kadapa Division, D. No. 3-4- 198 and 3-4-199, ^PP- Temple, Guntha Bazar, Pulivendula, YSR Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh. 2 The Principal Secretary to the Government, State of Andhra Pradesh, (CT) Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur Revenue District, Andhra Pradesh.
The Secretary (Finance Department) Union of India, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001. 4. One CC to SRI G NARENDRA CHETTY Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCS to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]
Three CD Copies gsg • L
■'0 HIGH COURT DATED: 30/04/2025 \ \ ORDER WP.No.8609 of 2025 2 k SFP ?025 m IS 11^ CurrenE ijecnon • V ★ -k ^^SPATCVie^ DISPOSING THE WP 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.