G Bhaskar Reddy vs. The Assistant Commissioner - Andhra Pradesh High Court, 25 March 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

■ 'f 4 N IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY. THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH A TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7871 OF 2025 reii; o o Between: M/s.G. Bhaskar Reddy, Works contractor, Rep. by its Proprietor, Mr. G.Bhaskar Reddy Bhanumukkala -518422, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh D.No.5-4, Reddys Colony Patha Banakacharla ...Petitioner AND 1. The Assistant Commissioner, (ST), Nandyal-ll circle. Kunrool District Andhra Pradesh. 2. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 3. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary (Finance) Ministry of Finance, North Block New Delhi 110001 ...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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the 1®* Respondent in issuing or V assessment order dated 22.1.2025 for the period 2022-23 under the Goods fnd Service Tax Act, 2017 in Form DRC -07 without generating the ,,.;^,Docun^ent Identification Number (DIN) on the summary order or the show «9use hotice as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1 Respondent to redo the assessment following the principles of natural justice. 1^0: 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 recovery of the disputed demand pursuant to the passed by the 1®* pending disposal of the Writ as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. ■rnpugned assessment order dated 22.1.2025 Respondent for the tax period 2022-23 Petition Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No’s 1 to 2: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No3:- The Court made the following

: ORDER KUDUPUDI

APHC010152662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) HfflS [3525] W? WEDNE AY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7871/2025 Between: G Bhaskar Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The Assistant Commissioner and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: ...RESPONDENT(S) 1.SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent{S):

GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following order: (perHon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment order, under FORM GST DRC - 07, dated 22.01.2025, passed by the 1®* respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the periods 2022-23. This assessment order of the 1 petitioner in this writ petition. St respondent has been challenged by the ■!!¥ 2 RRR, J & Dr. KMR W.P.No.7871 0/2025"^ This assessment order is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number.

Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on DIN number on the impugned

Learned instructions, submits that there is no assessment 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 Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa , on 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 ' 2024 (8*1) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)

T 3 RRR, J & Dr. KMR, J W.P.No.7871 of 2025 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 6. C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 22.01.2025, issued by the 1®' respondent, with liberty to the 1®* respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning 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 7. shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. i As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand l- A. VENUGOPALA RAO ASS!STANMEGISTRAR closed. //// i- To, SEGT N OFFICER

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, (ST) Nandyal-ll circle, Kunrool District, Andhra Pradesh.

State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi Guntur District.

The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary (Finance) Ministry of Finance North Block New Delhi 110001

One CC to SRI. SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Advocate [OPUC]

Two CC to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Advocate [OUT]

THREE CD Copies BKB

HIGH COURT BKB DATED:26/03/2025 ORDER I B2*U6?W5 I ^ . Current S«cuon ^ £gSPATC%jSg^ WP.No.7871 of 2025 sr DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS