Gone Venkata Subbarao vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Original PDF →
WP/8102/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01015840202525 March 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,K MANMADHA RAO8 pages
For Petitioner: SRI RAMINENI SUDHEERFor Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) , WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8102 OF 2025 Between: Gone Venkata Subbarao, S/o Narasaiah, Age 47 years, R/o D.No. 76- 16-11/5, Current Office Road, Joji Nagar, Bhavanipuram Vijayawada, NTR District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) Dept., Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Chief Commissioner of State Taxes, DNo.5-59, Bandar Road, Spring Valley Apartments, Rajiv Bhargav Colony Road, Edupugallu, Vijayawada. 3. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), No.I Division, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...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 Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the impugned order in Rc NO. I(9)/157/2020-9, dt 28.04.2022 for the Assessment Period July 2017 to March-2018 and April-2018 to March -2019 and consequential recovery proceedings in FORM GST DRC -13 Dt. 19.04.2024 without bearing any DIN as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the provisions of GST Act 2017, void, non-est in the eyes of law, contrary to the Article 19(l)(g) of the 4 Constitution of India, without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same and all consequential orders. 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 STAY impugned order in Rc NO. I(9)/157/2020-9, dt 28.04.2022 for the Assessment Period July 2017 to March- 2018 & April-2018 to March -2019 and consequential recovery proceedings in FORM GST DRC -13 Dt. 19.04.2024, pending disposal of Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAMINENI SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following order:

\A/.P.No.8102/2025 APHC010158402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3525] WEDNE AY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8102/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Gone Venkata Subbarao AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAMINENI SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.

GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri Ramineni Sudheer, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the respondents. The petitioner was served with an order in Rc.No.l(9)/157/2020-9 , dated 28.04.2022 passed by the 3'^' respondent for the assessment period 2. from July 2017 to March 2018 and April 2018 to March 2019; proceedings in Form GST DRC-13, dated 19.04.2024, Assistant Commissioner (ST)-II, Bhavanipuram Circle, IGST, COST, SGST Acts. These orders have petitioner in the present writ petition. and the recovery passed by the Deputy Vijayawada, under been challenged by the 2. This recovery order, in Form GST DRC-13, is chailenged by the 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, on an assessment on in the case of M/s. RRR,J & Dr. KMR.J 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 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.)

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 the impugned assessment order would have to be aside. 8. set

9.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned order in Rc.No.I(9)/157/2020-9, dated 28.04.2022 passed by the respondent for the assessment period from July 2017 to March 2018 and April 2018 to March 2019; and the recovery proceedings in Form GST DRC-13, dated 19.04.2024, passed by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-II, Bhavanipuram Circle, Vijayawada, with liberty to the respondents to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a 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. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.) K. SRINIVASA RAJU assistant registrar SECTION OFFICER / //// To,

1.

The Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) Dept., State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2 The Chief Commissioner of State Taxes, DNo.5-59, Bandar Road, Spring Valley Apartments, Rajiv Bhargav Colony Road, Edupugallu Vijayawada.

r ^ Commissioner (ST), No.I Division, Vijayawada

4.

One CC to Sri Ramineni Sudheer, Advocate [OPUC] ^ [Ol?n Commercial Tax, High Court of Andhra

6.

Two CD Copies , Krishna Pradesh. RAM

HIGH COURT n jDATED;26/03/2025 X D3 APR 2025 ^ . Current Section S^SPKTCVt^S' ORDER WP.No.8102 of 2025 DISPOSING OF 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.