BharatTaxGST

Kishor Kumar Reddy vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax

Original PDF →
WP/7856/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01014946202529 April 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,Y. LAKSHMANA RAO9 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATL (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY JHE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 'ey o X PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7856 OF 2C)9R Between; Mr. Kishor Kumar Reddy, S/o Mr. Venu Gopal Reddy, Aged about 62 years. Having office at H.No. 18-192/2, Flat No. 2, S.V. Towers, Yasodha Nagar, Tirupati - 517507. ...Petitioner AND 1. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, O/o AC (ST) Circle, D. No. 2/235, 0pp. Court Buildings, Venkatgiri Road, Gudur - 524101 2. The Sub-Registrar, MRO Office Compound, Near Railway Gate, Sullur Peta, Tirupati District - 524121 Gudur 3. The Chief Commissioner of State Tax, D. No. 5-59, RK Spring Valley Mandal, Apartments, Bandar Road, Edupugallu Village, Kankipadu Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh - 521144 4. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Commercial Tax), A P Secretariat, Velagapudi - 522 503 ...Respondents^ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue may a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring a) That the impugned order dated 10-10-2023 read with the summary in Form DRC-07 vide Reference No. ZD371023006307V dated 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 India , 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 DIN 3718032596031 dated 18-03-2025 issued by the Respondent No. 1 under the provisions of CGST/APGST Act, 2017 directing the Respondent to attach the immovable property of the Petitioner, is void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution 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. ^ No. 2 of India, and to lA NO: 1 OF 2Ci9fi ^ 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 operation of impugned order dated may be 10-10-2023 read with the summary in Form DRC-07 vide Reference No. ZD371023006307V dated 10-10-2023 passed by Respondent No. 1. 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 may be pleased

stay the operation of the Order i Form GST DRC-16 bearing DIN 3718032596031 dated 18-03-2025 passed by Respondent No. 1 . in 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 to permit the Petitioner to file the additional affidavit along with material papers and the Hon’ble Court may be peruse as a part and parcel of the Writ Petition.^ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following:

% APHC010149462025 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: 7856/2025 Between: shor Kumar Reddy ...PETITIONER [Vi 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 the petitioner, and learned G.P. for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents.

2.

The petitioner was served withO an assessment order, dated 10.10.2023, passed by the 1®* respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax RRR,J & Dr. YLR.J Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] The petitioner was also served with 18.03.2025, by the 1 for the period April, 2020 to March 2021. 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 property of the petitioner has been challenged by the petitioner. This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07 Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment this Court, in the case of M/s. (

<4 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 6. 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 7. proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon’bie Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Goya! Vs. Union of India & Ors\ The Hon’bie 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 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 ^ 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) ^2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)

RRR.J & Dr. YLR.J Deputy Commissioner. Speciai Circle, Visakhapetnem\ had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

9.

In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular i C.B.I.C., the non-mention of - issued by the 3 DIN number and absence of the signature of the assessing officer, in the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside.

10.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 10.10.2023 , and the notice in Form GST DRC-16 dated 18.03.2025, issued by the 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 date of receipt of this Order shall be excluded for the Needless to say, the order of attachment will stand abated order of assessment has been set aside. There shall be assessment order, till the purposes of limitation, as the underlying no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.' 7 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.) M. RAMESH BABU deputy REGISTRAR //// SECTION OFFICER

1.

The Deputy Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, O/o AC (ST), Gudur Circle, D. No. 2/235, 0pp. Court Buildings, Venkatgiri Road, Gudi^- 524101 To,

2.

The Sub-Registrar, MRO Office Compound, Near Railway Gate, Sulh^^^ Peta, Tirupati District - 524121

3.

The Chief Commissioner of State Tax, D. No. 5-59, RK Spring Valley Apartments, Bandar Road, Edupugallu Village, Kankipadu Mandal, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh - 521144

4.

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

5.

One CC to SRI. PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD Advocate [OPUC^

6.

Two CCs to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX ,High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

7.

Three CD Copies sree

a? HIGH COURT DATE0:30/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.7856 of 2025 g 2 * SfP 2IP5 mj “S’ -^J' 5^ . Currenj iieciion * 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.