Ravi Traders vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner

Original PDF →
WP/5768/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01010098202518 March 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,K MANMADHA RAO4 pages
For Petitioner: ROSEDAR S.R.AFor Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1 APHC010100982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH 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: 5768/2025 Between: Ravi Traders ...PETITIONER AND The Deputy Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ROSEDAR S.R.A Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

The petitioner was served with a show cause notice, in FORM GST DRC-01, dated 20.01.2024 and also with an assessment order, in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 11.06.2024, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] for the period 2021-2024, the said notice and the assessment order have been challenged by the petitioner.

2

2.

The show cause notice, in FORM GST DRC-01 and the assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, are challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number.

3.

Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned show-cause notice as well as on the impugned assessment order.

4.

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 & Ors1. 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.

5.

A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa 2, 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 non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

6.

In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number in the show-cause notice vitiates the impugned order which have to be set aside.

7.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the show cause notice, in FORM GST DRC-01, dated 20.01.2024 and the assessment order, in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 11.06.2024, passed by the 1st respondent, with a liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving a notice and by assigning a DIN number to the said order. The period from the date of filing 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, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO,J

______________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO,J

RJS

3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)

4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO &

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 5768 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Dt: 19.03.2025

RJS

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.