Mahaboob Basha Syed (Universal Enterprises) vs. The Assistant Commissioner(St) - Andhra Pradesh High Court, 18 March 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ■ I ANPHRA PRADESH ■■ (Special Original Jurisdiction) AMARA FIVE the honourable SRI jSstice^ THE HONOURABLE DR ^STICE miT PETITION Mr., -rnnn -p-, R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO K.IVIANMADHA RAO Between; Rot^dshlh? 1.1^' about'fg —Petitioner AND ^ Commissioner(ST) District Andhra Pradesh. Circle -I, Nellore, SPSR Nellore "■SadSh"' (ST), Chittoor Division, Chittoor, '■SadesT'°""' (ST), Appellate Authority, Tirupati, Andhra DeIZmot by Andhra Its Secretary, Ministry of Finance Depidi:n"r;L?afu*d^".%^ars Dr^rotA^nditr^r/dg? , New ...Respondents praying that in the High Court may or direction preferably a Petition under Article 226 the circumstances stated i be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order Writ in the nature of Writ of of the Constitution of India in the affidavit filed therewith mandamus (i) declaring the action of the Respondent - Commissioner (ST), Tirupati-ll Circle, in order dated 11-11-2022 The Assistant passing the adjudication as also order of the appellate authority 3 v' Respondent herein dated 10-12-2024 in CTD Order No. DIN3710122468309 without establishing mens-rea, without ^satisfying the ingredients mentioned in the section 122(1) (ii) The show cause notice is not preceded by intimation which would be issued in DRC-01A and issued without establishing the mens- rea or conducting any enquiry as requested by the Petitioner with the suppliers or buyers without there being any signature or DIN appended to the show cause notice and without signature on

assessment order (iii) the appellate authority dismissing the appeal vide its order dated 10-12-2024 without even considering the grounds as well as written arguments raised by the Petitioner violative of the principles of natural justice as the authority has not adhered to the provisions of the GST Act and rules and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and is in contrary to the judgments of various High Courts and also Hon'ble Supreme Court and consequently to 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 the collection of disputed penalty and interest pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M V J K KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order:

APHC010131822025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3525] WEDNE AY, 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: 7099/2025 Between: Mahaboob Basha Syed (universal Enterprises) AND The Assistant Commissionerst and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.MVJKKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S)

The Court made the following Order: (perHon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Raoj The petitioner had suffered an order of adjudication, dated 11.11.2022, in Form GST DRC-07, passed by the 1®' respondent- Assistant Commissioner (ST), Circle-1, Nellore. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner had approached the 3'”'^ respondent-Appellate Authority, by way of an appeal. This appeal was dismissed, by the 3^*^ respondent, by an Order dated 10.12.2024. The petitioner has challenged both the assessment order, dated 11.11.2022 as well as the appellate order, dated 10.12.2024, by way of this Writ Petition.

The petitioner has raised various grounds challenging both the orders. However, the main contention of the petitioner is that the original order of assessment had been passed on the basis of a show-cause notice, dated 11.10.2022, which did not contain the signature of the assessing officer and 3. 2 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 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 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-estan6 invalid.

Assistant 5. 19.03.2024, 6. on 7. 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, " 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)

3 issued by the C.B.I.C., had held that non-mention of a DIN number would mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam^, had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside. The effect of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., are that any proceeding without the signature of the assessing officer and also a DIN number is non-est and would have to be treated as not issued at ail. In such circumstances, the order of assessment, which is based on a show-cause notice, dated 11.10.2022, without the signature of the assessing officer and also a DIN number would also have to be treated non- est as the basis of the order itself is not available. Further, the consideration of this ground by the appellate authority would vitiate the order of the appellate authority also. The 8. as non In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the order of assessment, dated 11.11.2022, in Form GST DRC-07, passed by the 1®' respondent and the appellate order, dated 10.12.2024, passed by the 3'^^ respondent, with liberty to the 1®* respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number and the signature of the assessing officer on the said order. The period from the date of the impugned orders, 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.) A. VENUGOPALA RAO ASSISTANT.REGISTRAR //// To, SECTION OFFICER

The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Circle -I, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District Andhra Pradesh.

The Joint Commissioner (ST), Chittoor Division, Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh.

.f ^ Pradesh**'^'^^* Commissioner (ST) Appellate Authority. Tirupati, Andhra

The Secretary, Minis,^ of Finance, Union o, india. New De,hi-110001 to Sri M V J K Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] [OUT! °°"’'^®tciai Tax, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

Two CD Copies RAM

HIGH COURT DATED; 19/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.7099 of 2025 5 0 5 AUP20W ^ Current Section m DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS